Former President Donald Trump is seeking the dismissal of the extensive criminal conspiracy case against him in Georgia, contending that he is shielded from prosecution by presidential immunity.
The immunity claims presented in the Georgia case, filed on Monday as part of a motion to dismiss state-level criminal charges, closely align with those asserted by Trump’s defense team in the federal election subversion case.
The filing in the Georgia case, submitted on Monday, reiterates the consistent argument put forth by the former president’s legal representatives – asserting that Trump was acting in his official capacity as president when he allegedly undermined the 2020 election results, thus warranting immunity.
Trump’s attorney contends that the specific actions outlined in Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’ indictment “fall squarely within the ‘outer perimeter’ of the President’s official duties.”
This encompasses Trump’s public statements regarding the administration of the 2020 election, interactions with the Justice Department on election-related investigations, and the encouragement of the Vice President and Members of Congress to align their official responsibilities with the President’s perspective on the public good.
Supremacy Clause Invoked to Protect Trump in Georgia Case
Trump’s legal team is invoking the supremacy clause of the US Constitution as a strategy to safeguard him from criminal prosecution in Georgia.
The indictment of Trump in both the Georgia and federal cases is asserted to be unconstitutional, as presidents are purportedly shielded from criminal prosecution for “official acts” unless they undergo impeachment and conviction by the US Senate.
Steve Sadow, the lead counsel representing Trump in the Fulton County case, emphasized in a statement that they previously sought dismissal of the case on First Amendment grounds, a matter that remains undecided by the courts.
According to court filings, Trump’s legal representatives contend that the state-level justice system lacks the authority to impede federal duties.
If this argument proves successful, it has the potential to extend the protections surrounding the presidency even further than what Trump maintains in terms of the protections he believes he is entitled to under presidential immunity.