class=”sc-cffd1e67-0 fmXrkB”>
Once again, former president Donald Trump (77) is in the crosshairs of the judiciary. An appeals court in the US capital Washington dealt with the issue of the former president’s immunity.
The backdrop was Republican efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. The court addressed the question of whether Trump can be prosecuted at the federal level – or whether he is protected by immunity as a former president.
Unlike usual, this time Trump came to court in person and testified. The ex-president only announced on Monday that he would attend the court hearing. “The minimum I am entitled to is immunity from Biden’s false accusations!” he wrote on his own online network Truth Social.
The fact that Trump now wants to appear personally at the hearing of the appeals court in Washington probably mainly has to do with his election campaign. Because Trump, who faces a total of four criminal charges, wants to move back into the White House for the Republicans. Why exactly it works and how the hearing went – Blick provides the most important answers.
1
It’s all about this
Trump is charged with attempted election fraud. The 77-year-old’s lawyers want the charges dropped. Trump supporters stormed the Capitol in Washington on January 6, 2021. Congress met there to formally confirm Democrat Joe Biden’s victory in the presidential election. Trump had previously incited his supporters during a speech and still does not accept his defeat. Five people were killed as a result of the riots.
2
That’s what Trump’s lawyers say
Trump and his team claim that the Republican’s actions after the 2020 presidential election were part of his official duties as president. Declarations about elections were the responsibility of the president. Trump’s lawyers also said in court that it is only possible to prosecute a president if he has previously been convicted in an impeachment trial. That is not the case with Trump.
A few weeks after the storming of the Capitol, the US Senate acquitted Trump of responsibility in an impeachment trial because the majority of his Republicans supported him. It is a political process whose outcome also depends on political majorities. The Trump team’s argument therefore appears questionable, and the appeals court also expressed its skepticism during the roughly 75-minute hearing. And: even Republicans said at the time that it was up to the judiciary and not Congress to hold Trump accountable.
3
That’s what the public prosecutor says
As the New York Times reports, the three federal appeals judges gave Trump a hard time on Tuesday.
On Tuesday they expressed great skepticism about the former president’s central defense. All judges on the three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit — made up of two Democratic and one Republican appointees — pressed a lawyer for Trump with tough questions about the arguments he made in support of immunity. claims.
Special counsel Jack Smith’s team called on the court to deny the ex-president’s request. “The president has a unique constitutional role, but he is not above the law,” said researcher James Pearce of Smith’s team. The prosecutor also pointed out that unlimited criminal immunity for a president would open the door to all kinds of criminal offenses. By this logic, for example, a president could kill political opponents without being prosecuted.
A few weeks ago, the judge in charge of the case had already rejected a similar request and made it clear that overturning an election result was not among the official duties of a president.
The appeals court also now indicated that it does not want to follow the arguments of Trump’s lawyers. “I think it is paradoxical to say that his constitutional duty to ensure that the laws are faithfully executed allows him to violate criminal law,” CNN quoted a judge as saying.
4
The question will probably end up before the Supreme Court
However the appeals court decides, the case will likely end up before the U.S. Supreme Court because of its enormous importance. It would be the first time that the Supreme Court will consider whether ex-presidents enjoy immunity from prosecution at the federal level. This is also because never before in the history of the United States has a former American president been accused of criminal offenses.
Much depends on the decision. On the one hand, this means that the charge against Trump for attempted election fraud will make or break. The outcome is also crucial for the election campaign. Trump wants to return to the White House for the Republicans after the 2024 presidential elections. The candidacy primaries are just around the corner. Trump leads by far in internal party polls. So far, everything points to a new edition of the election campaign between him and the incumbent Joe Biden.
Trump, who has faced a total of four criminal charges, repeatedly portrays himself as a victim of the justice system, which has consequences for his supporters. A success on the immunity front should give him a further boost. To reinforce this story, Trump personally appeared in court on Tuesday – although he was not obliged to do so.
5
The Trump case could set a precedent
Last but not least, the decision on protection from criminal prosecution is of enormous importance for future presidents. If they truly enjoy immunity, they can commit crimes while in office without fear of consequences.
It would be the first time that the US Supreme Court will consider whether former presidents enjoy immunity from federal prosecution. This is also because never before in the history of the United States has a former American president been accused of criminal offenses.
On the online platform Truth Social, which he co-founded, Trump once again made his view of matters clear the day before: of course, as president of the US and commander in chief, he was entitled to immunity. As president, he only defended his country, he wrote. According to his argument, his behavior at the time was not an election campaign. (dzc/AFP/SDA)
Source: Blick
I am Amelia James, a passionate journalist with a deep-rooted interest in current affairs. I have more than five years of experience in the media industry, working both as an author and editor for 24 Instant News. My main focus lies in international news, particularly regional conflicts and political issues around the world.
