The latest on Donald Trump’s legal issues

Former President Donald Trump stood by his broad claims of immunity against January 6-related lawsuits brought against him by police officers and congressional Democrats in a Thursday court filing with a federal appeals court.

The Justice Department has argued that Trump cannot be immune in the lawsuits if he was found to have incited violence, something Trump’s new filing called an “unprecedented specific carve out” to presidential immunity.

Such an exemption to presidential immunity would throw “open the doors for civil claims against a President and creates a stricter standard for a President than for ordinary federal officials, who have successfully claimed qualified immunity on far more egregious facts,” Trump’s filing said.

“DOJ’s new carve out is a sui generis rule applied ex post facto that has no underlying principle or explanation beyond ‘we think what President Trump did was bad,’” Trump argued in the new filing. “This is not how the rule of law works.” 

The US DC Circuit Court of Appeals is considering whether the former president can be held liable for his conduct in the lead-up to the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol in a civil lawsuit brought by US Capitol Police officers and Democratic lawmakers.  

Trump argued that even if presidential immunity does not cover conduct that incites violence, his speech at the rally that preceded the riot would still be protected because he “never instructed the crowd to engage in unlawful activity.” 

“President Trump’s use of the word ‘fight’ was clearly metaphorical, referring to a political ‘fight,’ not a literal fistfight or other violent interaction,” his filing said. “For example, he stated, in reference to Rudy Giuliani, ‘He’s got guts. He fights, he fights.’ No reasonable listener would understand that metaphorical statement to suggest that Mr. Giuliani, a 76-year-old man, is getting into fist fights.”

The additional round of briefing was ordered after the DC Circuit heard arguments on the dispute over Trump’s potential immunity.

Those suing Trump over his January 6-related conduct also argued on Thursday that the former president’s sweeping claims of immunity should be rejected. But the lawmakers and police officers took issue with the DOJ’s recommendation that the DC Circuit issue a narrow ruling on presidential immunity that doesn’t say anything more about the immunity’s limits besides an exception for incitement.

The lawmaker and police officers argued that the DC Circuit should draw firmer lines around when a president can be immune for his conduct while he is in office, saying the question of whether Trump is immune in the case shouldn’t turn on whether he incited private violence, as the DOJ is arguing. 

Their filing said that there are non-violent actions Trump could have encouraged about Congress’ certification that would also fall outside the sphere of the “official” responsibilities of a president. 

“Urging private citizens to use any means that obstruct Congress from carrying out its constitutional duty to certify a presidential election—a procedure the Framers expressly placed beyond presidential reach—bears no connection to any presidential responsibility,” the lawmakers and police officers said in their Thursday submission. 

The court will keep jurors’ personal information confidential and take other measures to protect them during the trial on E. Jean Carroll’s civil lawsuit against former President Donald Trump, the judge handling the lawsuit said Thursday.

Judge Lewis Kaplan cited Trump’s history of attacking the legal system in explaining his reasoning for the extra security measures. In particular, Kaplan highlighted Trump’s most recent comments surrounding the Manhattan district attorney’s investigation into alleged hush money payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels.

“Mr. Trump’s quite recent reaction to what he perceived as an imminent threat of indictment by a grand jury sitting virtually next door to this Court was to encourage ‘protest’ and to urge people to ‘take our country back.’ That reaction reportedly has been perceived by some as incitement to violence,” Kaplan wrote.

“And it bears mention that Mr. Trump repeatedly has attacked courts, judges, various law enforcement officials and other public offices, and even individual jurors in other matters,” the judge added.

Kaplan, however, did not order the jury to be sequestered for the trial.

The Associated Press and New York Daily News had argued against keeping the jurors anonymous.

Some background: Carroll, a former magazine writer, alleged that Trump raped her in a New York department store dressing room in the 1990s and defamed her years later when he denied the rape, said “she’s not my type” and alleged she made the claim to boost sales of her book.

The trial on Carroll’s lawsuit accusing Trump of battery and defaming her is scheduled for April 25.

Lawyers for former Vice President Mike Pence were expected to argue in federal court Thursday to block a grand jury subpoena for his testimony related to January 6, 2021, on the grounds that he is protected by the Constitution’s Speech or Debate Clause, a person briefed on the matter told CNN.

Over 90 minutes at a sealed hearing in a US District Court in Washington, DC, former President Donald Trump’s legal team was also expected to argue Pence’s conversations with Trump around January 6 should be shielded by executive privilege.

The dispute stems from a subpoena issued in connection with the Justice Department’s special counsel investigation into actions by Trump and his allies after the 2020 election and leading up to the US Capitol attack.

Lawyers for Trump and Pence declined to comment to CNN.

Former President Donald Trump is also involved in several individual lawsuits that are making their way through the legal process — some of which he filed against other parties, including news organizations.

Ongoing lawsuits against Trump:

Ongoing lawsuits Trump has filed:

Former President Donald Trump faces multiple investigations, but the most immediate potential indictment could come from a probe related to his alleged role in a hush money payment scheme involving adult film star Stormy Daniels.

If Trump is indicted, then what happens?

One federal law enforcement source told CNN’s John Miller over the weekend that Trump’s Secret Service detail is actively engaged with authorities in New York City about how this arrest process would work.

It’s usually a routine process of fingerprinting, a mug shot and an arraignment. It would not likely be a public event and clearly his protective detail would move through the building with Trump. New York does not release most mug shots after a 2019 law intended to cut down on online extortion.

Here’s how various law enforcement agencies would play a role:

Video Ad Feedback

b11da05b-e2f3-45bd-80d9-48a73a7b2bba.mp4

02:59 - Source: cnn

What about a jury?

The Sixth Amendment guarantees “the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed.”

The New York State Unified Court System’s trial juror’s handbook explains the “voir dire” process by which jurors are selected. Those accepted by both the prosecution and defense as being free of “bias or personal knowledge that could hinder his or her ability to judge a case impartially” must take an oath to act fairly and impartially.

Could Trump ever go to jail?

He hasn’t been indicted, much less tried or convicted. Any indictment, even for a Class E felony in New York, would be for the kind of nonviolent offense that would not lead to jail time for any defendant.

“I don’t expect Trump to be put in jail if he is indicted for any of these charges. Jail time would only come if he were convicted and sentenced to jail time,” said Richard Hasen, a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles.

Hasen also said the Secret Service would have to arrange for his protection in jail — something that is logistically challenging.

CNN answers more questions related to the cases here.

Former President Donald Trump on Thursday remained defiant as the probe by the Manhattan district attorney’s office into the former president’s role in an alleged hush money payment scheme nears its final stages and a potential indictment of Trump looms. 

Trump claimed he was “100% INNOCENT” in a post on his social media website Truth Social on Thursday and baselessly claimed Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg was taking orders from the “RADICAL LEFT.” 

“OUR COUNTRY IS BEING DESTROYED, AS THEY TELL US TO BE PEACEFUL,” Trump wrote in all caps in the post. 

Over the weekend, Trump claimed he was going to be arrested on Tuesday and called for protests, prompting some allies and advisers to privately urge the former president to tone down his rhetoric, sources told CNN.

The office of Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg accused House Republicans of launching an “an unprecedent inquiry into a pending local prosecution,” while defending the investigation into former President Donald Trump’s hush money payments to an adult film actress during the 2016 election.

In a new letter to Republican lawmakers who earlier this week had sought information about the probe, the District Attorney’s Office’s general counsel Leslie Dubeck told the GOP House committee leaders that they lacked a “legitimate basis for congressional inquiry” and she noted that their requests for information “only came after Donald Trump created a false expectation that he would be arrested the next day and his lawyers reportedly urged you to intervene.”

Dubeck called the Republicans’ claims that the probe was politically motivated “unfounded.”

She added that, “regardless, the proper forum for such a challenge is the Courts of New York, which are equipped to consider and review such objections.” 

Still, she requested that the committees meet and confer with Bragg’s office to discuss whether the House has a “legitimate legislative” purpose for what it is seeking and whether those records could be turned over without infringing on New York’s sovereign interests.

The previous letter demanding information about Bragg’s investigation was sent Monday by House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, House Oversight Chairman James Comer and House Administration Chairman Bryan Steil, who criticized the hush money probe into Trump as an “unprecedented abuse of prosecutorial authority.”

Dubeck’s five-page response to the Republicans’ demands — which included testimony from Bragg as well as documents and communications related to the investigation — cited case law and legal arguments for why the GOP requests amounted to an “unlawful incursion into New York’s sovereignty.”

She said that the Constitution’s 10th Amendment limited the federal government’s authority over local law enforcement and argued that Congress specially is not an executive branch entity with law enforcement powers. Pointing to laws protecting grand jury secrecy, Dubeck added that the House Republicans were seeking “non-public information about a pending criminal investigation, which is confidential under state law,” and therefore, she argued, complying with the committees’ request would interfere with law enforcement. 

Dubeck also scoffed at the Republicans’ claims that they needed testimony from Bragg and the requested documents as part of a congressional review of federal public safety funds.

Dubeck wrote, “the Letter does not suggest any way in which either the District Attorney’s testimony about his prosecutorial decisions or the documents and communications of former Assistant District Attorneys on a pending criminal investigation would shed light on that review.”

But, she added, “nonetheless, to assist Congress in understanding the ways in which the DA’s Office has used federal funds, we are preparing and will submit a letter describing its use of federal funds.”

The Manhattan grand jury investigating Trump’s alleged role in a scheme to pay hush money to an adult film star will not hear that case when it convenes today, according to two sources familiar with the matter, pushing the Manhattan’s district attorney’s probe into next week.

After today, the Manhattan grand jury will next convene on Monday, when it is possible they could hear additional testimony from a witness.

The district attorney’s office declined to comment.

Grand juries typically hear multiple cases at a time.

More background: As the investigation nears its final stages, prosecutors are considering the historic nature of prosecuting a former president – an unprecedented act, sources tell CNN. Other sources tell CNN the DA’s office is taking a moment to regroup after the events of the past week.

New York District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office has suggested to an attorney for at least one witness in the past 24 hours that they might need to provide more testimony to the grand jury in its hush money probe, according to one source familiar with the probe.

The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office is trying to determine whether to call back Trump’s former lawyer and fixer, Michael Cohen, to refute the testimony provided earlier this week by lawyer Robert Costello —or to call an additional witness to buttress their case before the grand jurors consider a vote on whether to indict the former president, the source familiar with the investigation said.

A federal court hearing over former Vice President Mike Pence’s grand jury testimony and Donald Trump’s claims of executive privilege over their conversations around January 6, 2021, is set to happen under seal today in Washington, DC.

Trump’s defense attorneys Evan Corcoran, Jim Trusty, John Rowley and Tim Parlatore are at the courthouse as well as Pence’s attorney Emmett Flood. They are expected to argue Trump’s claims of executive privilege. Corcoran declined to comment. 

As CNN reported Wednesday, Corcoran is scheduled to testify Friday at the same courthouse before a federal grand jury investigating possible mishandling of classified documents found at Mar-a-Lago. A federal appeals has court ruled Corcoran must provide additional testimony and turn over documents about the former president as part of the criminal probe. 

Corcoran also declined Thursday morning to say whether he has complied with the appeals court order to turn over notes he had in the classified documents case.

CNN’s Sara Murray, Paula Reid and Kaitlin Collins contributed reporting to this post.

Former President Donald Trump’s defense attorney Evan Corcoran is scheduled to testify Friday before the grand jury investigating classified documents found at Mar-a-Lago after a new order from a federal appeals court, a source familiar with the matter told CNN.

The US DC Circuit Court of Appeals said that Corcoran must provide additional testimony and turn over documents about the former president as part of the criminal investigation into possible mishandling of classified documents.

The source said Trump’s side is unlikely to appeal to the Supreme Court.

In response to the decision, a Trump spokesperson said, in part, that “there is no factual or legal basis or substance to any case against President Trump” and that “prosecutors only attack lawyers when they have no case whatsoever.”

The announcement from a panel of three judges in the appellate court – less than a day after Trump sought to put Corcoran’s testimony on hold – adds momentum to the special counsel investigation as it seeks to secure evidence that could make or break a federal criminal case against Trump.

The Justice Department has successfully argued in court that prosecutors have enough evidence that Trump’s interactions with the lawyer were part of a possible crime that they can pierce the confidentiality of the conversations between the two.

The documents at issue in the case are Corcoran’s handwritten notes and transcribed verbal notes, regarding his representation of Trump in the Mar-a-Lago probe, according to a source familiar with the matter.

Corcoran previously testified and declined to answer some questions, citing attorney-client privilege. Prosecutors are also seeking access to notes from Corcoran.

It’s not fully known what Corcoran’s testimony and documents would reveal.

Former President Donald Trump is involved in four different criminal investigations by three different levels of government – but even if he is indicted or convicted, he can still run for president in 2024. Trump announced his candidacy in November.

“Nothing stops Trump from running while indicted, or even convicted,” Richard Hasen said, a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles.

The Constitution requires only three things of candidates:

As a political matter, it’s maybe more difficult for an indicted candidate, who could become a convicted criminal, to win votes. Trials don’t let candidates put their best foot forward, but it is not forbidden for them to run or be elected.

There are a few asterisks both in the Constitution and the 14th and 22nd Amendments, none of which currently apply to Trump in the cases thought to be closest to formal indictment.

Potential charges in regard to the hush-money payment have nothing to do with rebellion or insurrection. Nor do potential federal charges with regard to classified documents.

Potential charges in Fulton County, Georgia, with regard to 2020 election meddling or at the federal level with regard to the January 6, 2021, insurrection could perhaps be construed by some as a form of insurrection. But that is an open question that would have to work its way through the courts.

The extraordinary legal peril surrounding Donald Trump is reaching a fever pitch at the same time the former president is forging ahead in a 2024 Republican primary that is increasingly dominated by criminal investigations in New York, Washington and Atlanta.

Remember: There’s still no public information as to when or whether an indictment could be filed, leaving the former president and the public in suspense.

The Manhattan grand jury that has been hearing evidence in the case pertaining to Trump’s alleged role in a scheme to pay hush money to an adult film star will sit on Thursday, a source familiar with the investigation told CNN. NBC first reported the development.

There is still the possibility that the grand jury could be asked to vote this week, but it could also stretch into next week, the source said.

The grand jury has typically heard testimony on Monday, Wednesday and Thursday, but it did not meet on Wednesday. Earlier Wednesday, two sources told CNN that the grand jury was on standby, but it had not yet gotten a call to come in. Prosecutors do not have an urgent deadline as the grand jury sits until June.

New York District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office has suggested to an attorney for at least one witness in the past 24 hours that they might need to provide more testimony to the grand jury in its hush money probe, according to one source familiar with the probe.

The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office is trying to determine whether to call back Trump’s former lawyer and fixer, Michael Cohen, to refute the testimony provided earlier this week by lawyer Robert Costello – or to call an additional witness to buttress their case before the grand jurors consider a vote on whether to indict the former president, the source familiar with the investigation said.

Representatives for both the DA’s office and Cohen declined to comment to CNN.

Expectations are high that Bragg, a Democrat, is getting ready to make a decision on a potential indictment against Trump any day now over a hush-money payment scheme to adult film star Stormy Daniels. Bragg has said little about the status of the probe or whether Trump will even be charged.

Read more here.

It’s been nearly eight years since he rode down the escalator in Trump Tower and more than two years since the January 6, 2021, insurrection, but Donald Trump now faces several instances of legal trouble.

Here are some of the most notable investigations:

Hush-money payments: Manhattan district attorney

New York District Attorney Alvin Bragg appears to be in the late stages of the investigation into hush money paid to adult-film star Stormy Daniels late in the 2016 presidential campaign.

The $130,000 payment was paid by former Trump attorney and fixer Michael Cohen to Daniels to remain quiet about an alleged affair between Daniels and Trump years earlier. Trump has denied having an affair with Daniels and says the probe by Bragg, a Democrat, is politically motivated.

Mar-a-Lago documents: Did Trump mishandle classified material?

Special counsel Jack Smith is overseeing the Justice Department’s criminal investigations into the retention of national defense information at Trump’s resort and into parts of the January 6, 2021, insurrection.

The Justice Department investigation continues into whether documents from the Trump White House were illegally mishandled when they were taken to Mar-a-Lago in Florida after he left office. A federal grand jury has interviewed potential witnesses regarding how Trump handled the documents.

2020 election and January 6: US Justice Department

Smith’s purview also includes the period after Trump’s 2020 election loss to Joe Biden and leading up to the insurrection at the US Capitol.

As part of its investigation, the special counsel’s office has sought testimony from a number of key White House insiders, including former Vice President Mike Pence, Trump’s daughter Ivanka Trump and son-in-law Jared Kushner.

Aspects of the Justice Department’s probe include the use of so-called fake electors from states that Trump falsely claimed he had won, such as Georgia and Arizona.

2020 election and January 6: House select committee

The House select committee investigating the US Capitol attack issued an 845-page report – based on 1,000-plus interviews and documents collected, including emails, texts and phone records – that alleges Trump “oversaw” the legally dubious effort to put forward fake slates of electors in seven states he lost. Evidence shows, the report said, that Trump actively worked to “transmit false Electoral College ballots to Congress and the National Archives.”

In a symbolic move, the committee referred Trump to the Justice Department on at least four criminal charges before it concluded at the end of 2022, ahead of Republicans taking control of the House.

2020 election: Efforts to overturn Georgia results

Fulton County, Georgia, District Attorney Fani Willis oversaw a special grand jury investigating what Trump or his allies may have done in their efforts to overturn Biden’s victory in Georgia.

The grand jury issued a report – which remains mostly under seal – that found there was no widespread voter fraud in the state and also suggested perjury charges be considered against some people who testified. Overall, the grand jury recommended charges against more than a dozen people, the foreperson said in interviews last month.

Diver deeper here.