Discussion Of Trump’s January 6th Lawsuits
Dear Friends & Neighbors,
(Please click on red links & note magenta)
For updated global info & data on COVID-19, please click HERE. For updated global data & graphs on COVID-19, please click HERE. For COVID-19 cases and death counts in USA by state, please click HERE. For COVID-19 cases in Florida via Florida COVID Action, please click HERE. For COVID-19 cases in Florida, via Florida state government, please click HERE.
In response to some of our readers’ concern toward Trump’s lawsuits regarding January 6th, I’ve prepared an interview of Professor of Law at Cardozo School of Law, Jessica Roth, on the subject matter.
The legal team for former President Donald Trump is asking courts to toss multiple lawsuits filed after the January 6th attack on the U.S. Capitol. Cardozo Law School Professor Jessica Roth joins CBSN AM to break down the cases and explain the legal strategy, in the video published on Jan 11, 2022, “Trump claims immunity in effort to toss January 6th lawsuits“, below:
Trump’s attorney is claiming “broad presidential immunity” and first amendment as defense. Law school professor Jessica Roth clarifies broad immunity for us in the video above. If Trump succeeds in the “broad immunity” defense, all of the lawsuits against him would be dropped. According to Professor Roth, it would depend on whether or not events leading up to January 6 and the January 6 speech given by Trump were interpreted as “official government duty” because broad immunity would apply to official duty while private acts would not be under the protection of broad immunity. So, the question would be: whether or not his acts and speech inciting insurrection would be considered as official government duty.
Keep in mind that, excerpt from wikipedia on The First Amendment to the United States Constitution, below:
The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prevents the government from making laws which regulate an establishment of religion, or that would prohibit the free exercise of religion, or abridge the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, the freedom of assembly, or the right to petition the government for redress of grievances. It was adopted on December 15, 1791, as one of the ten amendments that constitute the Bill of Rights.
The First Amendment was designed to protect the American people (rather than the U.S. government or government official) and to prevent the U.S. government from infringing upon the rights of individual Americans.
If Trump’s attorney wants to claim “broad presidential immunity” as protection, then events leading up to January 6 and Trump’s speech on January 6 would had to be interpreted as official government duties. But if Trump were under official government duty, one would question if there would be any protection based on the first amendment since the first amendment was designed to protect American citizens from their government or government officials. In essence, by using both the “broad presidential immunity” and “first amendment” arguments simply means Trump’s attorney is trying to throw anything and every thing on the wall and see if anything would stick.
House Democrats are claiming that Donald Trump and his lawyer Rudy Giuliani violated the Ku Klux Klan Act and that they, along with other extremist groups, instigated the mob. Ku Klux Klan Act is an Reconstruction era law designed to protect people’s civil rights (notably African Americans who were deprived of the right to vote and civil rights that had been granted post-Civil War). One provision of the Act indicates that any private person who conspires with another to deprive an individual of the opportunity to exercise their civil rights can be liable. It also indicates that any private person who conspires to prevent official actors (such as government officials) from exercising their official duties also can be held liable. So the key question is: was there a conspiracy? Another interesting question is: whether a “conspiracy by tweet” may be held up in court? Can the court imply that there is a conspiracy based in part by things Trump said in public, through his social media accounts, and some of the responses posted by people in the crowd on January 6, 2021.
‘We must hold domestic terrorists accountable in this country’ — The NAACP has filed a lawsuit claiming that Trump violated the Ku Klux Klan Act when he attempted to overturn election results on Jan 6, in the video published on Mar 2, 2021, “NAACP Using Ku Klux Klan Act to Sue Trump Over Capitol Riot“, below:
Seven U.S. Capitol police officers are suing former President Donald Trump, Roger Stone, and members of white supremacist organizations, accusing them of coordinating the attack on the Capitol on January 6th, in the video published on Aug 26, 2021, “Capitol Police Officers Sue Trump Over Jan. 6 Role, CiteKKK Act Violation“, below:
The court will also decide on whether or not Trump’s speech and events leading up to January 6 riot is of criminal act.
Gathered, written, and posted by Windermere Sun-Susan Sun Nunamaker More about the community at www.WindermereSun.com
Any comments, suggestions, concerns regarding this post will be welcomed at info.WindermereSun@gmail.com
We Need Fair Value of Solar
~Let’s Help One Another~
Please also get into the habit of checking at these sites below for more on solar energy topics: