Former President Donald Trump’s lawyers argue in a new brief in his Jan. 6 case that he is “absolutely immune from prosecution” because his efforts to overturn the election were made in his official capacity as president.
The 52-page motion, filed Thursday in federal court in Washington, argues that the charges filed by Special Counsel Jack Smith are at the core of the president’s responsibilities and urges Judge Tanya Chutkan to fully enforce the criminal charges to point out.
“Each of the actions of the defendant charged in the indictment occurred while he was still serving as President of the United States, all of which, according to the plaintiff, were related to a federal government function,” Trump’s attorneys said. wrote.
“Given the all-consuming nature of the presidency, these facts alone strongly support the idea that the indictment is based solely on President Trump’s official actions,” they wrote.
Lawyers for former President Donald Trump argue in a new filing that special counsel Jack Smith’s complaint in federal court in Washington, D.C. relating to January 6 should be dismissed because Trump’s actions were taken in his official capacity.
“The indictment is based entirely on alleged actions within the core area of President Trump’s official duties, or at least within the “outer perimeter” of his official duties. Because President Trump is absolutely immune from criminal prosecution for such acts, the Court must dismiss the complaint,” they wrote.
It comes after Trump’s former White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows, tried to have his separate Atlanta case moved to federal court as conspiracy allegations against him stem from his time in the White House.
Trump lawyer John Lauro had previously indicated in court that his team would file such a motion – as one of many arguments why a March 4 trial date was unrealistic and unfair to his client.
Judge Chutkan will likely schedule hearings on the motion, and Trump’s lawyers will likely appeal if she rules against them.
Included in the dossier are references to the historic nature of the indictment, the first to charge a former president in federal court with conspiracy to defraud the United States. It also accused Trump of conspiring to obstruct an official procedure — the counting of electoral votes in Congress — and deprive voters of their rights.
“Every action by the defendant charged in the indictment occurred while he was still serving as President of the United States,” his attorneys note.
The Supreme Court has already ruled that presidents already enjoy immunity from civil lawsuits because of their official actions.
Trump’s lawyers go further, claiming that “the power to indict a former president for his official actions does not exist.”
They write that no court “has addressed whether such presidential immunity includes immunity from criminal prosecution for the president’s official act,” calling it a “serious and uncertain question of law.”
They point to the “chilling effect that personal liability would have on the president’s decision-making while in office if he could be held criminally liable for his decisions.”
“Breaking 234 years of precedent, the incumbent administration has indicted President Trump for actions that are not just within the ‘outer perimeter’, but at the heart of his official responsibilities as president,” Trump’s team wrote.
“In doing so, the plaintiff cannot and should not argue that President Trump’s efforts to ensure and advocate for election integrity fell outside his scope of office.”
The letter was signed by attorneys Todd Blanche, Lauro, Gregory Singer and Filzah Pavalon.
It comes in a week in which Trump made a series of angry statements in a Manhattan courthouse, where Trump and his company are facing up to $250 million in damages in a civil lawsuit.
Prosecutor Letitia James argues that Trump inflated property values in financial statements, and Judge Arthur Engoron ruled in a summary judgment that Trump was guilty of fraud.
Trump has used the court hearings to tout his overwhelming lead in Republican polls, attacking the judge as “rogue” and James as “incompetent.”
His lawyers call impeachment and conviction by the Senate the “exclusive method” to prosecute a president for crimes committed while in office.
Trump was acquitted twice by the Senate on charges related to his phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenksy and then on January 6.
“Here, 234 years of continuous historical practice – from 1789 to 2023 – provides compelling evidence that the power to indict a former president for his official actions does not exist,” the filing said.
“American history is replete with situations in which the opposing side passionately alleged that the President and his closest advisers had engaged in criminal conduct in the discharge of their official duties… criminal charges against the former President based on his performance of official duties . Nor has any state or local prosecutor, among the thousands of such officials in the history and tradition of the United States, attempted a similar maneuver,” they wrote.
Smith’s team is expected to respond on its own initiative. They have already prevailed on another motion, when Trump’s team tried to get Chutkan to withdraw from the case, based in part on her statement in court convicting the suspects on January 6.