Lindsey Graham was booed after Donald Trump introduced him at his South Carolina victory party.
https://twitter.com/Jules31415/status/1761553744536145991
Former President Donald Trump has filed a motion to dismiss the federal case against him in the Southern District of Florida. It is noted that Trump’s legal team pleaded that the charges, which arise from his actions during his presidency, are protected by presidential immunity, a principle deeply rooted in the separation of powers doctrine.
In four court filings, Trump’s attorneys implored Judge Aileen Cannon to dismiss the case. Trump’s defense asserted that the former president is immune from prosecution for actions taken in his official capacity.
“President Donald J. Trump respectfully submits this motion seeking dismissal of Counts 1 through 32 on the basis of presidential immunity, as these charges stem directly from official acts by President Trump while in office,” the defense wrote.
June 2023 saw the original indictment of Trump. Allegations that he mishandled secret materials, which were purportedly kept at his Florida home Mar-a-Lago, led to the indictment. In July 2023, a superseding indictment was filed against Trump, adding new accusations to the original ones. There are now 40 charges altogether as a result of this amended indictment.
The argument contended that while Trump designated some documents as personal and moved them from the White House to Mar-a-Lago, those actions qualified as “official acts” and were therefore covered by presidential immunity.
“President Trump was still the President of the United States when, for example, many of the documents at issue were packed (presumably by the GSA), transported, and delivered to Mar-A-Lago,” the motion explained.
The motion drew attention to the special legal and constitutional issues related to prosecuting a former president for acts committed while in government. They cited historical and legal precedents that demonstrate how the division of powers between the three branches of government prevents judicial review of an incumbent president’s or past president’s official actions.
In addition, Trump’s legal team contended that the Impeachment Judgment Clause provides constitutional protection against the prosecution of a president for acts taken while in office by implying that a president cannot be criminally punished unless first impeached and found guilty by the Senate. The goal of this interpretation is to bolster the idea that official presidential activities are immune from judicial review after the president leaves office.
Trump’s defense warned of the dangers to the presidency and the separation of powers, stating, “Without immunity from criminal prosecution, the President’s political opponents will seek to influence and control his or her decisions via de facto extortion or blackmail with the threat, explicit or implicit, of indictment by a future, hostile Administration, for acts that do not warrant any such prosecution.”
