The three judges on the appeals court responsible for considering the former US president's immunity made no secret of their skepticism about the arguments in his favor.
The three judges of the Washington Court of Appeals who heard Donald Trump's request for criminal immunity as a former president made comments on Tuesday, January 9, during debates in the presence of the person accused of trying to make the results of the criminal case illegal to overturn their skepticism about the 2020 election.
The big favorite in the Republican primaries for the November presidential election, which begins on January 15th in the state of Iowa, is trying with his numerous appeals to postpone his various criminal proceedings as late as possible, and in any case after the vote.
Donald Trump, who announced on Monday his intention to appear before the appeals court even though he was not required to do so, actually watched, without speaking himself, the debates, which lasted just over an hour and ended around 10:45 a.m. (December 15). :45 GMT).
Judge Tanya Chutkan, who will preside over her federal trial over her alleged unlawful attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 election, rejected her request for immunity on Dec. 1, saying no text protects a former president from criminal charges persecution protected.
“Allowing a president to be prosecuted for his official actions would open a Pandora's box from which this country may never recover,” Donald Trump's lawyer John Sauer said Tuesday. He raised the possibility of impeaching former Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama for providing false information about weapons available to Iraq in 2003 and for eliminating jihadists through drone strikes.
“Paradox”
Donald Trump's lawyers say he enjoys “absolute immunity” for his actions in the White House. They cite the Supreme Court's 1980s case law on civil lawsuits against former President Richard Nixon.
They also argue that he cannot be charged in this case because he was acquitted in the parliamentary impeachment trial against him over the attack on the Capitol on January 6, 2021, in which hundreds of his supporters tried to prevent the certification of his Democratic victory Opponent Joe Biden.
When one of the judges, Florence Pan, asked whether sending special forces to assassinate a political opponent or selling presidential pardons fell under these official acts, John Sauer answered “yes.”
“It would be paradoxical to say that his constitutional duty to ensure the faithful observance of the law authorizes him to violate the criminal law,” replied the court's president, Karen Lecraft Henderson.
“There have never been allegations that a president, through private individuals and using the levers of power, attempted to fundamentally undermine the democratic republic and the electoral system,” argued James Pearce. , a member of Special Prosecutor Jack Smith's team investigating the case.
Supreme Court in reserve
In her decision, Judge Chutkan concluded that the Nixon precedent does not apply to criminal proceedings against a former president and that impeachment proceedings are not criminal proceedings.
But an appeal by his lawyers put the proceedings on hold, which could derail the schedule of that trial, which is scheduled to begin March 4, worried Jack Smith.
Donald Trump, who pleaded not guilty in the case on August 3, 2023 in Washington, blames his legal problems on the administration of President Joe Biden, whom he is expected to meet in 2024 on the way to a revenge for 2020 The Supreme Court rejected Jack Smith's request for an expedited ruling on this issue, shortening the traditional appeals process and the associated delays.
But whatever the appeals court's decision, the parties it finds wronged will likely appeal to the highest court in the land. The nine Supreme Court justices, six appointed by Republican presidents and three by Democratic presidents, must then decide whether to venture into the political arena or, on the contrary, wisely abstain from it.
Donald Trump is also facing election interference charges in Georgia state courts and is also facing federal court charges for his alleged negligent handling of classified documents after leaving the White House.
” data-script=”https://static.lefigaro.fr/widget-video/short-ttl/video/index.js” >