Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) is still paying close attention to news related to efforts to hold participants in the Capitol riot and those whose incitement fueled their actions accountable.
After the Justice Department concluded that Trump could, in fact, be sued by interests including local police officers from D.C. over some of the comments he made and behavior he perpetrated as president, Schiff celebrated the development. “Glad to see that the victims of January 6 will get to seek redress,” the Congressman said on Twitter. “Being president doesn’t give you the right to incite violence against cops and other fellow citizens. The police officers who defended our democracy are heroes. They deserve their day in court.”
The specific nature of the latest turn of events is that the Justice Department provided a requested opinion in a proceeding in a federal appeals court. Prior to reaching the appeals level, a district court already ruled against the attempt from Trump’s corner to shield the ex-president from facing even the hint of a consequence inherent in allowing the lawsuit to stand. The department, while not commenting conclusively on the substance of the allegations, observed that comments of the sort Trump was alleged to have made are outside of established protections for comments to the public from individuals serving as president.
“Speaking to the public on matters of public concern is a traditional function of the Presidency, and the outer perimeter of the President’s Office includes a vast realm of such speech,” attorneys in the Civil Division at the Justice Department said, in a section highlighted by The Washington Post. “But that traditional function is one of public communication. It does not include incitement of imminent private violence.” In another portion that the Post also highlighted, the department also seemed to respond to some of the arguments that have been made in the ex-president’s circles about this kind of thing, namely, that allowing the kinds of scrutiny he was trying to stop could chill, either through intimidation or direct legal action, the behavior of future presidents. The department found there was still plenty that would remain clearly protected.
Blocking “absolute immunity to incitement of imminent private violence should not unduly chill the President in the performance of his traditional function of speaking to the public on matters of public concern,” they said. It was still up to the appeals court to actually rule on allowing the lawsuit to stand, it seemed. Trump is also facing other civil litigation (which is a sort that could result in financial and reputational penalties) tied to the riot, including from Sandra Garza, the longtime romantic partner of the late Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick.
Glad to see that the victims of January 6 will get to seek redress.
Being president doesn’t give you the right to incite violence against cops and other fellow citizens.
The police officers who defended our democracy are heroes. They deserve their day in court.
— Adam Schiff (@RepAdamSchiff) March 3, 2023
