- Trump claims immunity from prosecution
- Judges skeptical of argument
- Trial scheduled for March
A group of justices on the United States Court of Appeals appeared to be extremely skeptical of Donald Trump’s claim that, as a former president, he should be exempt from prosecution on allegations of colluding to rig the 2020 United States presidential election.
Trump, 77, attended the appeals court hearing held in a federal courthouse on Tuesday, January 6, 2021, just streets away from the US Capitol, which his supporters stormed. The hearing was conducted under strict security.
Trump, the leading candidate for the Republican presidential nomination in 2024, acquiesced in silence as a three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals deliberated the arguments for just over an hour. Later, he addressed reporters and threatened “anarchy” in the United States should his prosecution proceed.
President Trump, acquitted twice by Senate Republicans on charges of conspiring to overturn the 2020 election won by Democrat Joe Biden, is scheduled to go on trial in Washington on March 4. During his presidency, he was impeached twice by the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives.
According to John Sauer, Trump’s attorney, prosecution of a president for actions during his presidency is contingent upon that individual having been impeached and convicted by Congress.
Debating Presidential Immunity Standards
Sauer stated, “Permitting a president to be prosecuted for his official actions would unlock a Pandora’s box from which this country might never recover.”
US prosecutors contend that when Trump urged his supporters to march to the Capitol and exerted pressure on officials to overturn election results, he was not acting as president but rather as a candidate.
The immunity claim of former President Trump was denied by US District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is scheduled to adjudicate over his trial, a month ago. On Tuesday, the same judges who heard his appeal appeared to be unconvinced by the argument.
Former Republican president George HW Bush appointed Judge Karen Henderson, who stated, “I find it paradoxical that his constitutional duty to ensure that the laws are faithfully executed” permits him to contravene criminal statutes.”
Do you mean to imply that a president has the ability to sell pardons, military secrets, or instruct SEAL Team Six to eliminate a political rival?” Judge Florence Pan posed the question to Sauer.
“Invest in your future with Webull UK – get started with free shares.”
Controversy Over Presidential Prosecution Rules
Sauer maintained that the president could only face prosecution in this particular scenario if Congress first impeached and convicted him.
That, according to James Pearce, an attorney for the United States Department of Justice, would permit a president to abdicate prior to impeachment and avoid punishment, is an “extraordinarily frightening” possibility.
In opposition to the assertion of immunity, Pearce argued that Trump’s actions were out of the ordinary.
Pearce stated, “Atrocities against a sitting president allegedly conspiring with private individuals to fundamentally undermine the democratic republic and the electoral system through the use of power levers have never before been made.”
“Despite his unique constitutional responsibility, the president is not exempt from the law.”
The plaintiff, Special Counsel Jack Smith, is enthusiastic about bringing the case against Trump to trial before the November election. A pause has been imposed on the case pending the appeal.
In addition to attempting to have the case dismissed, Trump’s attorneys also hope to profit from a lengthy appeals process that may cause the trial to be delayed beyond its originally scheduled March commencement date, and possibly even after the election.
The timeframe for the court’s decision on the appeal remains uncertain; however, court representatives have indicated their intention to complete the task expeditiously.
