Halberstam v. Welch highlights that 'the fact of encouragement was enough to create joint liability' under an aiding-and-abetting theory, emphasizing the significance of suggestive authority.
The court clarified that 'mere presence... would not be sufficient' for joint liability, indicating the necessity of active encouragement in assessing responsibility for an act.
Plaintiffs argue that Trump's January 6 Speech contained 'suggestive words' that 'planted the seeds of action,' which, coming from someone in authority, carries substantial weight.
The allegations assert that without Trump's urging of rally-goers to march, the Capitol assault would not have occurred on such a large scale, indicating a plausible claim.
Collection
[
|
...
]