DOJ Brief Does The Unexpected: Defends Trump

President Biden’s Justice Department defends former President Trump in Capitol insurrection lawsuits, presenting a rare intersection of legal precedents and presidential immunity.

At a Glance

Trump can be sued by Capitol Police officers and Democrats regarding the Jan. 6 insurrection.
The DOJ told a Washington federal appeals court to allow the lawsuits to move forward, rejecting Trump’s claim of absolute immunity.
A president is not protected by immunity if his words incite imminent private violence.
The DOJ’s brief was filed separately from the criminal investigation into Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election.

Legal Context and Presidential Immunity

The issue revolves around whether former President Donald Trump can face legal action for the events of January 6, 2021. Injured Capitol Police officers and Democratic lawmakers have brought lawsuits alleging that Trump’s rhetoric incited the violence that occurred during the Capitol insurrection.

Trump’s defense claims he was acting within his official duties and did not intend to incite violence. However, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta ruled that Trump’s rally speech before the Capitol riot was likely an incitement not protected by the First Amendment.

The Department of Justice did not take a stance on whether Trump’s words directly incited the attack, but they emphasized that a president cannot claim absolute immunity if his words incite imminent private violence. The DOJ’s brief, filed by the Civil Division, underscores the importance of maintaining a nonpartisan approach to legal doctrines, suggesting that presidential immunity has limits when it comes to inciting violence.

On the third anniversary of the January 6 Capitol attack, United States Attorney General Merrick B. Garland delivers an update on the Justice Department's efforts to hold all January 6 perpetrators, at any level, accountable under the law. pic.twitter.com/KLTYf4JuJV

— U.S. Department of Justice (@TheJusticeDept) January 6, 2024

DOJ’s Position and Broader Implications

The DOJ’s position upholds that Trump cannot entirely escape civil liability for his actions on January 6. This brief, however, does not indicate any perspective on potential criminal liability concerning the January 6 events. By emphasizing these legal precedents, the DOJ aims to ensure the separation of powers and the rule of law remain intact.

For reference, Trump’s pending lawsuits are associated with federal civil rights violations and seek damages for both physical and emotional injuries to the plaintiffs, including Capitol Police officers James Blassingame and Sidney Hemby and several House Democrats like Rep. Eric Swalwell.

Reminder: No one person or organization is above the law.

Standing on this very principle, the NAACP moved forward with participation in the Capitol Insurrection lawsuit.

Any attack on our democracy should be met with justice. https://t.co/mm5S1BaK4c

— NAACP (@NAACP) March 2, 2023

What’s Next for Trump?

As Trump prepares for his 2024 presidential run, these legal challenges continue to surround him. The case represents one of many legal hurdles Trump faces, with others including a Georgia probe into election interference and a federal investigation concerning classified documents found at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida. Special counsel Jack Smith has also subpoenaed former Vice President Mike Pence during the ongoing investigation into Trump’s efforts to retain power.

While the future outcomes of these lawsuits and investigations remain uncertain, what’s clear is that the Justice Department’s action marks a significant conversation on constitutional protections, presidential conduct, and the limits to presidential immunity.