Skip to main content
Defend Our Country Digest

Defend Our Country Digest — January 11, 2024

By January 11, 2024No Comments

Driving the Day

Must Read Stories

Federal Appeals Court hears Trump’s immunity claim in election interference case; appears to have doubts

  • Wall Street Journal: Donald Trump’s Presidential Immunity Appeal Meets Judges’ Skepticism: “The legal reckoning for Donald Trump entered a critical stretch Tuesday as a Washington federal appeals court signaled it would reject the former president’s claim that he is immune from prosecution on charges he plotted to overturn the 2020 election. Trump was present in the courtroom mere blocks from the Capitol and is expected to sit in on a hearing Thursday in his civil fraud case in New York, with the Iowa caucuses less than a week away. Though Trump isn’t required to be there, his presence in court reflected how his legal defense has merged with his presidential ambitions as he seeks to capitalize on a torrent of criminal jeopardy and cast himself as the target of politicized prosecutions.”
  • New York Times: Trump’s Immunity Claim in Court: “It looks like Donald Trump ran into a wall today while pushing his position that he cannot be charged criminally for his efforts to remain in power after losing the 2020 election. It came in the form of three federal appeals court judges. With Trump looking on from beside his lawyers in the courtroom in Washington, the judges poked holes in the legal reasoning behind his claims that presidents cannot be prosecuted for actions they take in office. By the time they were done, there was not much doubt they were leaning toward rejecting this central element of Trump’s defense in the election subversion case.”
  • Washington Post: Highlights from Trump’s immunity claim court hearing: “Three judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit reacted with skepticism Tuesday to Donald Trump’s unprecedented claim that a former president cannot be put on trial for any crime related to the office unless first impeached and convicted by Congress. Judge Karen L. Henderson, the lone Republican appointee on the court, expressed some concern about opening the ‘floodgates’ for politically motivated prosecutions of future presidents, which Trump’s lawyer repeatedly warned would be the outcome if the case goes forward. But Henderson joined the two Democratic appointees on the panel in expressing doubts about Trump’s legal arguments. At one point she said it was ‘paradoxical to say that his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed allows him to violate criminal laws.’”
  • New York Times: What happens next in Trump’s immunity case?: “A federal appeals court in Washington has now heard arguments on former President Donald J. Trump’s sweeping claim that he is immune from prosecution on charges of plotting to overturn the 2020 election. The court has already moved the case along at an exceptionally brisk pace and is expected to make its decision fairly quickly by the standards of a typical appeal. Here’s a look at what could happen once that decision comes in.”
  • Washington Post: Trump’s legal flip-flops get their day in court: “Donald Trump often tries to have his legal cake and eat it too. He has derided the idea that he could be indicted, despite repeatedly pushing for prosecutions of his political rivals. He has baselessly attacked his prosecutions as being the work of President Biden, despite telling Hillary Clinton at a 2016 debate that if he became president “you’d be in jail.” He has labeled it a travesty that judges would take decisions out of voters’ hands by disqualifying him from the ballot, despite repeatedly suggesting that his political opponents should be disqualified. And as an appeals court took up Trump’s unprecedented claim to presidential immunity from criminal prosecution on Tuesday, the stark, self-serving shifts in Trump’s standards amid his own legal jeopardy got their day in court, too.”
  • New York Times: Trump Shows Little Emotion During Hearing, Then Says He ‘Did Nothing Wrong’: “The small courtroom was already packed when former President Donald J. Trump walked slowly inside. “Where should I sit?” Mr. Trump asked the lawyers who arrived with him shortly before a three-judge panel heard arguments over his claims that he is immune to criminal prosecution in a case over his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. After showing little emotion during the hearing, which lasted about an hour and 15 minutes, Mr. Trump suggested that the special counsel’s office had been forced to concede two key points, although he offered little detail on what those issues were.”
  • CNN: How far does ‘absolute immunity’ go? Trump’s lawyer argues for the incredible extreme: “Former President Donald Trump has long argued that his supporters are so committed that he could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue in New York City, shoot someone and not lose them. One of his lawyers made the argument in federal court Tuesday that he might not be prosecuted either. The question at hand is whether Trump and all presidents achieve “absolute immunity” from prosecution. Trump faces four different criminal prosecutions, and his strategy, beyond delaying these trials, is to argue that as a guard against political prosecutions, he simply cannot be prosecuted.”

Ray Epps, a central figure in Jan. 6 conspiracy theories, receives probation for Capitol riot role

  • ABC: Former Oath Keeper admits ‘the election was not stolen’ during Jan. 6 sentencing: “Former Oath Keeper Ray Epps was sentenced to one year of probation on Tuesday for his role during the attack at the Capitol on Jan. 6. In addition to the year of probation, Epps received a $25 fine, $500 restitution and 100 hours of community service. Before his sentencing, Epps said that he never should have believed claims that the 2020 election was stolen. ‘Truth is not always found in the places I used to trust,’ Epps said in court on Tuesday, appearing virtually and noting that what he called ‘Trump cult’ turned on him.”
  • Washington Post: Man who was subject of Jan. 6 conspiracies sentenced to probation: “More than 850 people have been convicted of crimes related to the Jan. 6, 2021, attack, but a prosecutor told a federal judge in D.C. on Tuesday that no case was quite like the twisting saga of the graying man who appeared before him by Zoom for sentencing: James Ray Epps Sr. Epps had been on the front lines of the mob as it pushed toward the Capitol, but the prosecutor said that he was the only defendant known to have tried to de-escalate the violence at points and that he turned himself in to the FBI on Jan. 8, 2021. He cooperated with authorities and the House committee investigating the attack.”
  • New York Times: Ray Epps, Target of Jan. 6 Conspiracy Theory, Is Sentenced to Probation: “Ray Epps, the former Trump supporter who became a target of a conspiracy theory that he was an undercover government agent who helped to instigate the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, was sentenced on Tuesday to a year of probation for his own small role in the riot instead of the six months in prison that prosecutors had requested. The probation sentence, imposed after Mr. Epps had pleaded guilty last year to a single count of disorderly conduct stemming from his presence in the pro-Trump mob near the Capitol, brought his prosecution to a close. But it was unlikely to end the persistent false narrative that he was a provocateur out to entrap his fellow conservatives on Jan. 6 even though he, his lawyer, the prosecutor, and even the judge overseeing the case all asserted in open court that the tale was preposterous.”

In the States 

OHIO: Federal judge upholds Ohio’s new election law, including a strict photo ID requirement

  • Cleveland Plain Dealer: Federal judge tosses lawsuit challenging Ohio’s voter ID law: “A federal judge has thrown out a lawsuit from left-leaning groups challenging a Republican-backed Ohio law requiring voters to show ID at the polls and altering the state’s early-voting times, among other changes. U.S. District Judge Donald Nugent on Monday granted requests by Republican Secretary of State Frank LaRose’s office and the Ohio Republican Party, among others, to grant summary judgment against the plaintiffs in the case, which included the Northeast Ohio Coalition for the Homeless, the Ohio Federation of Teachers, the Ohio Alliance for Retired Americans and the Union Veterans Council. Their lawsuit, filed a year ago Tuesday in the Northern District of Ohio, claimed the voting changes in House Bill 458 would unconstitutionally disenfranchise younger voters, senior citizens, Black voters and military members. The groups also argued that the changes serve no legitimate purpose, given how rare voter fraud is in the state.”

NORTH DAKOTA: A federal judge orders a new state legislative district for two Native American tribes, North Dakota Secretary of State says the state will abide by the ruling

  • Associated Press: Judge orders new North Dakota legislative district for 2 Native American tribes: “A federal judge on Monday ordered a new joint North Dakota legislative district for two Native American tribes that successfully argued a map created through redistricting in 2021 violated the Voting Rights Act by diluting their voting strength. U.S. District Court Chief Judge Peter Welte’s decision to adopt and implement a new map comes after a flurry of court filings in the lawsuit since his Nov. 17 ruling that the state’s 2021 redistricting map ‘prevents Native American voters from having an equal opportunity to elect candidates of their choice.’ The judge had given North Dakota Republican Secretary of State Michael Howe and the GOP-controlled Legislature until Dec. 22 ‘to adopt a plan to remedy the violation.’ The deadline passed with no new map as Howe and lawmakers sought a delay of the judge’s ruling and more time to respond.”
  • Bismarck Tribune: North Dakota to follow judge’s redistricting order for 2024 election, despite appeal: “The North Dakota Secretary of State’s Office says it will abide by a federal judge’s order to use a legislative district map preferred by two Native American tribes despite a pending appeals court ruling in the case. ‘Secretary of State Michael Howe will be moving forward for the 2024 election with Judge Welte’s court-imposed map,’ a statement sent Tuesday from the Secretary of State’s Office said. U.S. District Judge Peter Welte on Monday ordered that the state must use a map that includes the Turtle Mountain Reservation and the Spirit Lake Reservation in the same legislative district to give the tribes a chance at fair representation. Citing the Voting Rights Act, the tribes successfully sued the state over legislative district lines drawn in 2021. The 2021 redistricting put Turtle Mountain in its own subdistrict — 9A — and Spirit Lake in District 15. After Welte’s order, the two reservations will be together in District 9.”

LOUISIANA: New governor called the Louisiana Legislature in for a special session to redraw the state’s congressional map over a federal court ruling

  • Louisiana Illuminator: Louisiana Legislature to take on congressional redistricting in special session: “Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry has ordered state lawmakers into a special session to begin Jan. 15 on redistricting and elections. The wide-ranging call, issued just hours after Landry took office, calls on the legislature to update voting boundaries for the state’s congressional and Louisiana Supreme Court Districts. The governor also wants lawmakers to address campaign finance laws, federal election qualifying fees, primary elections, and other election-related policies. The Republican-dominated legislature approved new congressional maps in a 2022 special redistricting session. They maintained a single majority Black congressional district out of six, despite one-third of the state’s population being Black. Black voters challenged the map in court, culminating in a November decision from the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals that upheld a district court ruling that requires lawmakers to add a second majority Black district for Louisiana in the U.S. House of Representatives.”
  • Associated Press: Newly sworn in, Louisiana’s governor calls for special session to draw new congressional map: “ In his first hours in office, Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry on Monday called a redistricting special session, giving lawmakers the opportunity to draw and replace the state’s current congressional map that a federal judge said violates the Voting Rights Act by diluting the power of Black voters. Landry, a Republican, assumed office at noon on Monday and only a few hours later issued an executive order for a special session, calling lawmakers back to the Capitol from Jan. 15 to Jan. 23. But the session looks to go beyond just tackling Louisiana’s congressional map, with the governor issuing a list of other issues to address, including redrawing state Supreme Court districts and moving away from Louisiana’s current open primary election system to a closed one.”
  • FOX 8: ACLU says it is ready for trial if Louisiana legislature falls short on redistricting map: “As state lawmakers prepare to convene in a special session on redistricting next week, the American Civil Liberties Union says it hopes the legislature approves a new congressional map that adheres to the Voting Rights Act. If not, the ACLU says it is ready to go to trial. Redistricting is the redrawing of electoral district boundaries. It is supposed to happen every 10 years, after the U.S. Census, to make sure each district has about the same number of people and districts are representative of a state’s electorate. ‘After the Census, we see where populations have moved. And that redistricting process allows us to reapportion the congressional seats,’ said Brandon Davis, an assistant professor in Tulane University’s Department of Political Science. Federal Judge Shelly Dick ruled that the congressional map Louisiana’s Republican-controlled legislature approved last year violates the Voting Rights Act and dilutes the power of the state’s Black voters.”

What Experts Are Saying

Laurence Tribe, Norman Eisen, and Taylor Redd, regarding Trump’s immunity case hearing, for CNN: “Team Trump tried to press the argument that this doctrine mandates presidential immunity. But placing presidents above the law — by making them immune from criminal accountability — gets separation of powers backward and upends the rule of law. Indeed, the one judge on the panel thought most likely to be favorably inclined toward Trump, Judge Karen Henderson, who was appointed by President George H.W. Bush, pointedly remarked that it seemed paradoxical to say that a president’s constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed entitles him to violate those very laws. The separation of powers principle is among the reasons why there is no express constitutional provision permanently immunizing presidents for crimes committed while in office. Faced with that problem on Tuesday, Trump turned to the structure of the Constitution and its framers’ intent. But his arguments were left in tatters by the special counsel and indeed by the judges’ questions. As Judge Michelle Childs pointedly noted to Trump’s counsel, Trump’s immunity claim is irreconcilable with this nation’s history: Why, for example, would President Gerald Ford have pardoned Richard Nixon, if absolute criminal immunity existed?”

Marc Elias for Democracy Docket: “Immediately after the Jan. 6 insurrection, Republicans signaled they had had enough. Even as Republican profiles in cowardice refused to impeach him, Trump seemed alone and isolated. Even his most stalwart allies on Fox News and in the GOP offered criticism and kept their distance. This was short-lived. Predictably, what Republican elites wanted for their party soon ran headlong into the buzzsaw of the grassroots. Right-wing activists poisoned by years of Trump-filled lies and conspiracy theories demanded new investigations into the 2020 election and new legislation to combat nonexistent voter fraud. Republican officials who initially recoiled at the events of Jan. 6, soon came to see it as an electoral opportunity. They could simultaneously ingratiate themselves with MAGA voters and enact legislation that would give them a partisan advantage in future elections. The result was a new wave of voter suppression laws targeting Black, brown and young voters with a fury not seen since the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s.”

Joyce Vance, regarding Trump’s immunity case hearing, for X (Twitter): “Donald Trump made some predictable comments after yesterday morning’s oral argument. As he finished, a reporter shouted out a request that he use the moment to tell his followers; No violence.’ The former president walked out of the room without responding. That was the only exchange he was in control of yesterday. The top line from the argument: a broad consensus among observers that the panel didn’t buy Trump’s immunity argument. None of the Judges seemed to believe Trump should be immune from prosecution.”

Rakim Brooks, court cases brought by Unions and judges who rule on these cases, for Democracy Docket: “In last year’s Glacier Northwest v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, the Supreme Court further weakened union protections by subjecting union organizers to liability for alleged destruction of property — undermining the authority of the agency created under the NLRA to govern such decisions. Only Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the Court’s lone public defender, declared how noxious the decision was to working people. “Workers are not indentured servants, bound to continue laboring until any planned work stoppage would be as painless as possible for their master,” she wrote. “They are employees whose collective and peaceful decision to withhold their labor is protected by the NLRA even if economic injury results. We need more. When our judges are more familiar with our experiences — whether through advocating for us or through their own similar experiences — that wisdom transforms the justice they dispense.”

Andrew Weissmann, regarding Trump’s immunity case hearing, on X (Twitter): “So shocking to hear Trump’s counsel say a president is free to sell pardons and kill political opponents, unless and until successfully impeached (which may never happen for a host of reasons).”

Headlines

Extremism

Washington Post: Violent political threats surge as 2024 begins, haunting American democracy

Time: Misogyny Is a Precursor to Terrorism

Daily Beast: Police Investigated MAGA Michigan Leader For Partner Violence

New York Times: Trump Has Suggested Violence Could Erupt if Court Cases Do Not Go His Way

Trump investigations and cases

New York Times: One of Trump’s Oldest Tactics in Business and Politics: I’m Rubber. You’re Glue.

Newsweek: Fani Willis Allegations Won’t Save Donald Trump—Here’s Why

Atlanta Journal-Constitution: Who is Nathan Wade, Fulton special prosecutor in Trump case?

The Messenger: Trump Lawyers Given Eight Tranches of Unclassified Documents to Prep for Mar-a-Lago Trial

The Hill: Trump planning to deliver closing argument in civil fraud trial

January 6 and the 2020 Elections

The Hill: GOP senators slap down Trump on Jan. 6 ‘hostages’

Newsweek: Teary-Eyed January 6 ‘Bullhorn Lady’ Admits ‘I Destroyed Everything’

Washington Post: James Comey: Donald Trump isn’t coming for us. The rule of law is coming for him.

Opinion

Washington Post: Ruth Marcus: Trump’s sly ‘I’m immune from prosecution’ claim finally runs aground

The Hill: Paul Kahn: The coming Trump constitutional crisis — and how to avoid it

New York Times: Sam Adler-Bell: Trump Does Not Want to Be Contained. He Wants to Be Obeyed

In the States

Atlanta Journal-Constitution: VP Harris visits ‘ground zero’ for voting rights battle in Atlanta

WVTF: Virginia legislators hope to restore former felon’s voting rights

Wisconsin State Journal: Wisconsin judge rules that absentee voting van used in 2022 was illegal