In the election fraud trial, former US President Trump claims to have been immune by virtue of his office. The defense warns that a president who faces criminal prosecution after leaving office can no longer make decisions freely. A court is critical of the argument.
Former US President Donald Trump appeared for the first time in months at a trial over his supporters’ storming of the Capitol.
His lawyers argued before an appeals court in Washington that Trump enjoyed absolute immunity for his actions as president. If his client is tried for official acts, that would open the door to politically motivated criminal charges, said defense attorney John Sauer.
Several judges were skeptical.
Trump incited the crowd
Almost three years ago, Trump called on supporters to “march to the Capitol,” where his election defeat against Joe Biden was to be certified, and to “fight like hell.” An angry mob entered the building and demolished parts of the facility. The deputies had to be brought to safety. Five people were killed.
Special Counsel Jack Smith has charged Trump with attempts to influence the outcome of the 2020 election: conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to stop the certification of Biden’s election victory and conspiracy to violate the right to vote. Trump has pleaded not guilty and also believes he is immune from prosecution for his official actions.
The district judge Tanya Chutkan, who is handling the case, sees it differently, but has suspended the proceedings against Trump until the appeals court has decided on his arguments.
Prosecution: No “absolute immunity” in the constitution
Trump’s lawyer Sauer told the appeals court: “If a president has to look over his shoulder every time he or she has to make a controversial decision and wonder whether he or she will go to prison for it after leaving office If my political opponents come to power, it will inevitably weaken the president’s options.”
The prosecution countered that the US Constitution does not provide for absolute immunity for presidents. Such a rule would also contradict the principle of separation of powers.
Judges skeptical
Two judges were critical of the defense’s arguments. “I think it’s paradoxical to say that (the president’s) constitutional duty to ensure that the laws are faithfully applied allows him to violate the criminal law,” Karen LeCraft Henderson said.
Her colleague Florence Pan pointed out that the defense itself had admitted certain limitations to immunity. The appeal court also hinted at the possibility of declaring itself not responsible at this point. The criminal proceedings are not scheduled to begin until March.
Defense plays for time
Trump said after the court date that the hearing was a crucial day in the proceedings. He protested his innocence and once again declared himself a politically persecuted person. “A president must have political immunity,” he said.
The outcome of the appeal could be crucial for Trump’s strategy to delay the start of the criminal trial. If the court declares itself not to have jurisdiction, the case would end up in the Supreme Court more quickly.
Trump’s defenders want the trial to begin after the November elections. If Trump were to be re-elected president, he could order the Justice Department to stop prosecution or even try to pardon himself.
Trump warns of “chaos in the country”
Trump has warned of “chaos in the country” if the prosecutions against him continue. It would be “very unfair” for him to be prosecuted by the Justice Department as a political opponent of President Joe Biden, Trump said. It is an attempt to win the presidential election in November “this way”.
Trump wants to challenge Biden in the election and, according to polls, has the best chance of being nominated by his Republican Party for the election on November 5th. The Republican primaries to choose their presidential candidate begin next Monday (local time) in the state of Iowa.
Julia Kastein, ARD Washington, tagesschau, January 9th, 2024 12:24 p.m