Trump lawyers seek dismissal of DC federal election subversion case

Law Reviews

Lawyers for Donald Trump asked a judge Thursday to dismiss the Washington federal election subversion case against him, arguing the Republican is immune from prosecution for actions they say were taken in his official role as president.

The motion amounts to the most pointed attack yet by defense lawyers on the federal case charging Trump with plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election he lost to Democrat Joe Biden. It tees up a fight over the scope of presidential power, forcing courts to wrestle with whether the actions Trump took in his failed bid to remain in office fell within his duties as commander-in-chief or whether they strayed far outside his White House responsibilities and are subject to prosecution.

“Breaking 234 years of precedent, the incumbent administration has charged President Trump for acts that lie not just within the ‘outer perimeter,’ but at the heart of his official responsibilities as President,” the defense motion states. “In doing so, the prosecution does not, and cannot, argue that President Trump’s efforts to ensure election integrity, and to advocate for the same, were outside the scope of his duties.”

The presidential immunity argument had been foreshadowed for weeks by defense lawyers as one of multiple challenges they intended to bring against the indictment.

Special counsel Jack Smith’s team is expected to vigorously contest the motion. It is not clear when U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan might rule, but potentially protracted arguments over the motion — including an expected appeal if she denies the request — could delay the case as courts step into what defense lawyers described an unsettled question.

The Supreme Court has held that presidents are immune from civil liability for actions related to their official duties. But Trump’s lawyers noted in their motion that no court has addressed the question of whether that immunity shields a president from criminal prosecution, hinting that the defense will likely fight the issue all the way to the nation’s highest court.

Related listings

  • A Supreme Court redistricting ruling gave hope to Black voters

    A Supreme Court redistricting ruling gave hope to Black voters

    Law Reviews 09/17/2023

    The Supreme Court’s decision siding with Black voters in an Alabama redistricting case gave Democrats and voting rights activists a surprising opportunity before the 2024 elections.New congressional maps would have to include more districts in ...

  • A federal appeals court made medication abortions harder to get in Guam

    A federal appeals court made medication abortions harder to get in Guam

    Law Reviews 08/07/2023

    People seeking medication abortions on the U.S. Territory of Guam must first have an in-person consultation with a doctor, a federal appeals court says, even though the nearest physician willing to prescribe the medication is 3,800 miles (6,100 kilom...

  • Court sides with Jack Daniel’s in dispute with makers of dog toy

    Court sides with Jack Daniel’s in dispute with makers of dog toy

    Law Reviews 06/24/2023

    The Supreme Court on Thursday gave whiskey maker Jack Daniel’s reason to raise a glass, handing the company a new chance to win a trademark dispute with the makers of the Bad Spaniels dog toy.In announcing the decision for a unanimous court, Ju...