"Judge Amit Mehta ruled that some of the president's alleged actions in whipping up the crowd that morning fell outside even the Supreme Court's wildly expansive view of what counts as an 'official' act for the purposes of immunity."
"Trump again insists that an adverse ruling 'will open floodgates for incitement decisions' and thereby constrain First Amendment protections, now focusing on the ramifications for public citizen speech."
Donald Trump is attempting to dismiss a civil case linked to the January 6 events, arguing for immunity based on a Supreme Court standard. However, Judge Amit Mehta ruled that some of Trump's actions in inciting the crowd do not qualify for this immunity. Trump also requested a reconsideration of a ruling that his speech could be seen as incitement, comparing himself to a rapper to illustrate potential implications for First Amendment protections. He argues that adverse rulings could impact public citizen speech.
Read at Above the Law
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]