A federal judge has ruled that former President Donald Trump is not immune from civil claims alleging he incited the attack on the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. The decision allows lawsuits brought by Democratic members of Congress and law enforcement officers to move forward.

Judge Mehta's Ruling

U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta ruled on Tuesday that Trump’s remarks at his “Stop the Steal” rally, held near the White House before the siege, “plausibly” constituted inciting words not protected by the First Amendment. The judge determined that much of Trump’s conduct on January 6th, including the speech and related social media posts, does not qualify for immunity.

Scope of Immunity

However, Mehta clarified that Trump cannot be held liable for his official acts during the riot, such as remarks made in the Rose Garden or interactions with Justice Department officials. “President Trump has not shown that the Speech reasonably can be understood as falling within the outer perimeter of his Presidential duties,” Mehta wrote in the 79-page ruling. He further stated the content of the Ellipse Speech was not covered by official-acts immunity.

Previous Rulings and Appeals

This is not the court’s first ruling on the matter. In February 2022, Judge Mehta previously refused to dismiss the claims against Trump, finding he wasn’t entitled to presidential immunity. That decision was upheld by an appeals court, leading to Tuesday’s ruling, which applies a “more rigorous” legal standard.

The judge emphasized that this decision isn’t a final pronouncement on immunity, stating Trump can still assert official-acts immunity at trial, but will face a higher standard of proof.

The January 6th Speech

During the rally, Trump told his supporters, “We fight. We fight like hell and if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.” Plaintiffs argued that Trump was acting as a private individual seeking office, not in his official capacity, and therefore not protected by immunity. They cited Supreme Court precedent stating that office-seeking conduct falls outside the scope of presidential immunity.

The Lawsuit

The lawsuit was initially filed by Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., along with Trump’s personal attorney Rudolph Giuliani, and members of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers extremist groups. Additional Democratic members of Congress and law enforcement officers later joined the litigation. The civil claims remained valid even after Trump’s widespread act of clemency following his second term, which included pardons and dismissals of cases related to the Capitol siege.

Damon Hewitt, president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, hailed the ruling as a “monumental victory for the rule of law, affirming that no one, including the president of the United States, is above it.” He added that the court correctly recognized Trump’s actions fell outside the scope of presidential duties.