Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett said Tuesday the ruling against former President Donald Trump by a federal appeals court had “real flaws.”
A three-judge panel from the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled Tuesday against Trump’s arguments that he enjoyed immunity from prosecution for his efforts to contest the results of the 2020 election. Jarrett argued the court’s ruling had “real flaws” that warranted review by the Supreme Court. (RELATED: After Jack Smith’s SCOTUS Setback, Former Federal Prosecutor Says Georgia Case Is Dems’ Best Bet To Jail Trump)
“I did read the 57 pages and I do think there are some real flaws in the D.C. circuit court opinion,” Jarrett told Fox Business host Larry Kudlow. “For example, it claims that Trump has become citizen Trump, that’s a quote, so he has no immunity. That’s not what this is about, that is not what the former president is arguing. What he is saying is, that his actions as president in challenging what he believed was a flawed election were consistent with his duties to uphold the law. Now, he may have been mistaken in that belief, but that doesn’t erase his intent, an essential element of the charges against him.”
WATCH:
“The court dismissed the notion that taking away immunity would have a chilling effect on future presidents,” Jarrett added. “Let’s tap our common sense, inevitably it would. Just about every president would now have to vet every decision by a team of lawyers so he doesn’t get charged when he leaves office. Do we want lawyers to be commanders in chief and not the president?”
Special counsel Jack Smith secured a four-count indictment against Trump in August. Legal experts noted that much of the conduct Smith claimed was criminal in the indictment appeared to be protected by the First Amendment.
“It goes to the Supreme Court and of the cases which the Supreme Court accepts from the D.C. circuit, roughly 70% are reversed,” Jarrett predicted. “That is the good news. The bad news for Trump is, the high court doesn’t take many appeals, less than 10% from the D.C. circuit court. So, the question is this going to be different? It could be, Larry, because this is an unprecedented prosecution. It would dramatically affect future presidencies and at stake is the separation of powers and immunity protections which, by the way, judges and members of Congress have — but the president doesn’t have?”
Harvard University law professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz said that the indictment not only attacked the First Amendment, but also Trump’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.