Judge Deals Trump Setback In Civil Suits Over Capitol Riot

A federal judge delivered a serious setback to President Donald Trump Tuesday in long-running civil lawsuits seeking to hold him liable for the violence at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta ruled that evidence produced so far in the litigation brought by police officers and Democratic lawmakers indicated that Trump’s speech at the Ellipse that day was political in nature and not subject to the immunity the Supreme Court has found for a president’s official acts.

“President Trump has not shown that the Speech reasonably can be understood as falling within the outer perimeter of his Presidential duties,” Mehta wrote. “The content of the Ellipse Speech confirms that it is not covered by official-acts immunity.”

The 79-page ruling, years in the making, follows numerous efforts by Trump to scuttle the lawsuit by claiming he is protected by presidential immunity from liability for his actions on the day of the Capitol Riot and in the weeks leading up to that event.

But the decision also portends years of additional litigation and appeals, likely ensuring that Trump will be contending with the lawsuits for the remainder of his presidency. It also prolongs the wait for a resolution to one of the last remaining efforts by that day‘s victims to pursue accountability.

Joseph Sellers, an attorney for Democratic lawmakers suing Trump, welcomed the decision.

“We’re very pleased that the court recognized that President Trump cannot avoid accountability for his conduct on Jan. 6, 2021,” the lawyer said in an interview. “This decision, if it holds up, is going to pave the way to a trial in federal district court on these claims.”

In a statement, Trump’s legal team disputed the judge's conclusion, but did not outline any specific next steps.

“The facts show that on January 6, 2021, President Trump was acting on behalf of the American people, carrying out his official duties as President of the United States," the statement said. "President Trump will continue to fight back against the Democrat Witch Hoaxes and keep delivering historic results for the American People.”

While Mehta’s ruling generally favored the plaintiffs, he certified some issues for another appeal by Trump’s lawyers. That’s expected to stall the cases for a year, or longer if the Supreme Court agrees to get involved, although some further fact-finding could proceed in the meantime.

“We may have a trial in the spring or summer of 2028,” Sellers said. That would be more than seven years after the events at issue in the cases.

The bulk of Mehta’s ruling was an effort to assess whether Trump’s actions could reasonably be seen as “official” conduct, which would largely protect it from being held against him in a civil lawsuit.

Mehta also concluded that a call Trump placed to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger on Jan. 2, 2021, pleading with him to find 11,780 votes so Trump could be declared the winner, was political in nature. “These are the words of an office-seeker imploring a state official to alter the outcome of Georgia’s election, not those of an incumbent President acting in his official capacity,” the judge wrote.

While the judge ruled that the speech and many other Trump activities appeared to be unofficial, he said a handful of Trump actions — including his directions to Justice Department officials and social media messages prepared during the riot — had enough official character that they couldn’t be used against Trump in any trial.

Mehta, an Obama appointee, also said Trump would be able to try to press his immunity claims again at trial, even though the evidence to support his position was too weak to block a trial altogether.

“The court’s decision today is not a final pronouncement on immunity for any particular act,” the judge wrote. “President Trump remains free to reassert official-acts immunity as a defense at trial.”

In the decision Tuesday, Mehta also declined to disturb an earlier ruling he made that Trump’s speech could be viewed in the context of his other actions as incitement and not protected by the First Amendment. The judge also rejected the Justice Department’s attempt to shut down the case by certifying that Trump was acting in his official capacity.