Donald Trump returns to the White House on June 1, 2020, escorted by the Secret Service after appearing outside the St. John’s Episcopal Church.
(AFP via Getty Images)
Legal team on behalf of US Department of Justice Asked federal judges to dismiss a series of proceedings against the former president Donald Trump, Former Prosecutor General William P. Barr, and Protesters At Lafayette Park in the United States military And police forces.
Lawyers argued that Mr. Trump and other officials could not face civil lawsuits related to police actions aimed at securing the president and his move. This is a peculiar position for the Biden administration. And this move has the effect of freeing Mr. Trump from violent episodes.
A lawyer at the Justice Department argued that Mr. Trump’s sweeping of a park in Washington, DC to pose with the Bible was unusable against the former president.
by Washington PostLawyers argue that future violent police action against protesters is unlikely, as Mr. Trump is no longer in power and the Biden administration is no longer discussing its relationship to the racial justice movement. doing.
The American Civil Liberties Union, Black Lives Matter, and other civil liberties and protesters trumped events on June 1 when military members, federal and local police hit bullets, fired gas, and fired. He and other officials have accused him of plotting. 30 minutes in protesters to clear the park for a photo shoot of the former president. Mr. Trump posed awkwardly with the Bible in his hand outside the so-called “Presidential Church.”
The ACLU legal team said that if the judge agreed with a Pentagon lawyer, he would “allow atrocities without punishment” for future presidential actions against protesters.
They said, under Pentagon debate, the president and his aides “may have been able to use live ammunition to clear the park, and no one claims it as an attack on constitutional rights. Would be. “
There are legal precedents to protect security forces from proceedings related to their efforts to protect the president.
In 2004, after the Supreme Court was moved two blocks away from the Oregon restaurant that then President George W. Bush was visiting, they claimed that freedom of speech had been violated by protesters. , Ruled that secret service agents cannot be sued for damages.
The Secret Service said it moved protesters “beyond the range of pistols and explosions.”
Justice Department barrister David G. Cutler argued that the proceedings against Mr. Trump and other officials were similar, and the plaintiff was “the president of the United States.”
U.S. District Court Judge Dabney Friedrich, who heard oral arguments about the dismissal motion, seemed to respond to the Pentagon’s request.
“How to overcome obvious national security concerns about the president’s security?” The judge asked plaintiffs.
Before that, she said, “It seems like I have to clean up the square in front of him. [Mr Trump] Walk towards the church. Why is it not rational? “
On the day of the incident, the White House claimed that demonstrators had been targeted to implement a 7 pm curfew conducted by district leaders. National park police against protesters suspected of throwing projectiles. He claimed to be acting for self-defense.
Mr. Barr and other officials claimed that the crowd had been wiped out as part of an existing plan to clear the square.
Randy M. Mastro, one of the plaintiffs’ representative lawyers, gave a contradictory explanation justifying the actions taken against the protesters as evidence that the Pentagon’s national security claims were false. It pointed out.
“Now I hear the defendant say,’Oh, this is about the president’s security’ ????” Mastro said, “But the president is always in danger. No defendant claimed to have been. “
He argued that the real explanation for the violence against protesters was in Mr. Trump’s own words.
Lawyers referred to Mr. Trump’s instructions to state leaders to “control your city and your state” to quell protests, saying, “In Washington, people do this. I’m going to do something I’ve never seen before. “
This wasn’t the only time Mr. Trump came to support violence against demonstrators.
He once tweeted in response to a protest in Minneapolis that “shooting begins when looting begins,” and when demonstrators outside the White House broke the gate, they were “greeted with the most vicious dogs and the most sinister weapons.” I’ve seen it. ” “
EXPLAINER: What is the Senate Philibuster? Why change it?
Associated Press Digest 2:00 pm
A Trump-loving church that uses guns in sacred rituals buys a facility near Waco, Texas