Trump wins delay to Jan. 6 civil suits during bid for immunity

A federal judge granted President Donald Trump’s request to again pause a collection of lawsuits seeking to hold him responsible for violence at the U.S. Capitol five years ago while he pursues an immunity defense.

U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta ruled on Thursday that Trump is entitled to a complete pause on activity in most of the cases during an appeal on the immunity issue. Mehta in March rejected Trump’s argument that he was entitled to a legal shield because he was acting in his official capacity as president in late 2020 and early 2021.

The eight lawsuits brought by Democratic politicians in Congress and law enforcement officers and their relatives were filed after the Jan. 6, 2021, riots at the Capitol, when thousands of Trump supporters descended on the complex as lawmakers met to certify President Joe Biden’s win over Trump in the presidential contest.

Mehta did find that officers in one of the cases who are pursuing a broader conspiracy allegation against individuals who were members of extremist groups on Jan. 6 could move ahead with gathering evidence, but not from Trump.

Trump pardoned or granted executive clemency to the more than 1,500 people who faced criminal prosecutions for their conduct on Jan. 6. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche announced this week that the Justice Department would abandon a plan to create a $1.8 billion fund for victims of political “weaponization” that was likely to benefit Jan. 6 defendants. Many of those individuals had already filed claims for compensation through a different administrative process.

Mehta denied Trump’s immunity bid during earlier rounds of the litigation, and the cases were largely on hold for several years while the dispute went through a round of appeals. Trump was given another chance to argue the defense after both sides gathered more evidence. Mehta ruled against him again in March, finding he had failed to show he was performing official duties during key moments, such as a rally in Washington on Jan. 6 that preceded the riots.

The Supreme Court sided with Trump several years ago in finding that presidents are shielded from criminal prosecution for at least some official acts taken while they were in office, but hasn’t ruled on his push for immunity against civil claims.

Joseph Sellers, a lead attorney for Democratic lawmakers in one of the cases, said that he was “disappointed” that they couldn’t go ahead with even limited evidence-gathering, but that Mehta made a “fair assessment” that their inquiries ultimately would lead back to Trump.

One of Trump’s personal attorneys didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Separate from the immunity issue, Mehta also denied the Justice Department’s efforts to step into the case on Trump’s behalf and effectively take over his defense. The department is appealing that ruling.

The case is Lee v. Trump, 21-cv-400, US District Court, District of Columbia (Washington).