Federal judge ‘quickly disposes’ of Trump’s immunity claims in victory for Brian Sicknick’s estate

WASHINGTON, DC: Presidential immunity claims were swiftly and neatly dismissed on Tuesday, January 2, 2024, by the Washington, DC judge presiding over the wrongful death lawsuit brought against former President Donald Trump by Brian Sicknick's partner over the attack on the US Capitol Complex on January 6, 2021.

Judge Amit P Mehta of the US District Court dismissed the former president's arguments out of hand in a fairly concise analysis.

Per Law&Crime, the judge wrote in the 12-page memorandum opinion and order, “The court first addresses, and quickly disposes of, former President Trump’s assertion of immunity from suit.”

What were the events preceding Officer Brian Sicknick's death?

Officer Sicknick died on January 7, 2021, after being pepper-sprayed in the face during the Capitol breach.

According to the DC Medical Examiner's Office, his death was attributed to a series of strokes that were caused by "all that transpired" the day before.

Sandra Garza, who was designated in Sicknick's will as his domestic partner and executor of his estate, filed a lawsuit on January 5, 2023, against Donald Trump and the two men found guilty in connection with the attack on the deceased cop.

The perpetrator who used the pepper spray is Julian Elie Khater, who was sentenced to six years and eight months in prison, having pleaded guilty to two counts of assaulting, resisting, or impeding officers using a dangerous weapon.

George Tanios, the second man, who brought the can of pepper spray but did not use it, pleaded guilty to a couple of misdemeanors and was sentenced to time served.

What did Brian Sicknick’s partner Sandra Garza claim in the lawsuit?

Garza alleged in her lawsuit that “Trump’s false and incendiary allegations of fraud and theft” and his “express calls for violence at the rally” are accountable for the “violent mob” that charged the US Capitol on January 6.

The lawsuit alleges specifically that the 45th president is responsible for “inciting” Khater’s and Tanios’ unlawful behavior.

Each of the defendants mentioned in the case filed against them lodged a motion to dismiss the lawsuit.

One of the defendants, Trump, claimed absolute immunity as grounds for dismissal.

Specifically, he contended that his actions during the rally on January 6, 2021, were within the scope of his duties as the then-sitting President of the United States and, therefore, he could not be held liable.

However, Trump's argument appears to have been previously rejected in similar lawsuits that have progressed further, and as a result, it apparently may not hold up in the present case either.

In a memo, Trump's lawyers pushed for immunity in the Sicknick lawsuit once more. Nevertheless, their argument failed.

Judge Mehta wrote, “That argument is now foreclosed by the DC Circuit’s decision in Blassingame v. Trump.”

He added, “There, like here, President Trump argued that ‘a President’s speech on matters of public concern is invariably an official function, and he was engaged in that function when he spoke at the January 6 rally and in the lead-up to that day'. But the Circuit held that, at the motion to dismiss stage, the plaintiffs had plausibly alleged that the former President’s alleged actions, including his speech at the Ellipse, were not within the outer perimeter of a President’s official responsibility.’ The same is true here.”

The issue of immunity has emerged as a prominent factor in several legal disputes involving the former President, who is also anticipated to be the presumptive nominee of the Republican Party for the upcoming 2024 Presidential election.

Internet reacts as Trump faces another legal hurdle

People on social media trolled the former US President as his re-election campaign is getting marred by the legal consequences of his sordid past.

One X user remarked: "I’m not sure “only on day one” will be enough time for retribution."

Another user tweeted: "But hey, let's all jump to conclusions and assume that this is some kind of grand political conspiracy. Because clearly, everything is about politics these days. And let's not forget to use this as an opportunity to rehash all the old arguments and debates about the events surrounding the death of Brian Sicknick. Because clearly, that's what this is really about - scoring political points and stirring up outrage."

One Facebook user commented: "Ask yourself why is trump** pleading “immune,” and not “innocent.” Hmmm…"

Another user wrote: "If trump hadn’t called on his foot soldiers to attack the Capitol. Officer Sicnic would be alive today. lock that Mfer up !!!!"

Another user stated: "This is what represents the Republican party now, you older Republicans must be proud. Now when people think of the Republican party they think liars, conmen, religious radicals, domestic terrorists, and armed gunmen at the polling places. At this point any vote for a republican is traitorous."

Finally, this Facebook user commented: "Thank you to the Judge! I’m glad that Brian’s wife is suing Trump and hopefully she gets what she deserves."

This article contains remarks made on the Internet by individual people and organizations. MEAWW cannot confirm them independently and does not support claims or opinions being made online.