FOX News legal analyst Greg Jarrett said Tuesday that the federal appeals court's ruling against former President Donald Trump is “seriously flawed.”
A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on Tuesday rejected Trump's claims that he enjoys immunity from prosecution for his efforts to contest the results of the 2020 election. He ruled against it.Jarrett argued his case in court ruling There were “serious deficiencies” that warranted review by the Supreme Court. (Related: After Jack Smith's SCOTUS setback, former federal prosecutor says Georgia case is Democrats' best bet to jail Trump)
“I read page 57, and I think there are some serious flaws in the D.C. Circuit opinion,” Jarrett told FOX Business host Larry Kudlow. “For example, Mr. Trump claims that he has become a Trump citizen, but this is a quote and therefore he is not immune. This is not what the former president is claiming. What he is saying is that his actions as president to contest what he believed to be a flawed election were consistent with his duty to uphold the law. He may have been wrong, but that does not eliminate his intent, which is a key element of the charges against him.”
“The court rejected the idea that stripping away immunity would have a chilling effect on future presidents,” Jarrett added. “Let's use our common sense, it's inevitable. From now on, almost every president will have to scrutinize every decision by his legal team to avoid being indicted upon leaving office. Would we want a lawyer to be commander-in-chief instead of president?”
Special Counsel Jack Smith secured four indictments against Trump in August. Legal experts noted that many of the acts that Smith claimed were criminal in the indictment appear to be protected by the First Amendment.
“The cases go to the Supreme Court, and about 70 percent of the cases that the Supreme Court receives from the D.C. Circuit are thrown out,” Jarrett predicted. “That's good news. The bad news for Trump is that the high court doesn't take many appeals, with less than 10% of appeals coming from the D.C. Circuit. So the question is, is this different? It could be. No, Larry, because this is an unprecedented prosecution. It will dramatically affect the future of the presidency, and what is at stake is the separation of powers and the immunity guarantees that judges and lawmakers have. , does that mean the president doesn’t have that?”
Alan Dershowitz, a professor emeritus of law at Harvard University, said the indictment attacked not only the First Amendment but also Trump's Sixth Amendment right to counsel.
All content produced by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent, nonpartisan news distribution service, is available free of charge to legitimate news publishers with large audiences. All republished articles must include our logo, reporter byline, and DCNF affiliation. If you have any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact us at email@example.com.