We recently reported on two civil suits filed by members of Congress against Donald Trump for his actions directly arising out of the January 6th insurrection.

First, Rep. Bennie Thompson, a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, filed suit under an 1800s law called the “Klu Klux Klan Act” which – in the years after the Civil War – made it illegal for anyone to interfere with a black man fulfilling his duties in Congress (In the 1800s, only men ran for office). The law is still on the books and it appears that Donald Trump incited people to interfere with Rep. Thompson’s abilities to do his duties.

Then, Rep. Eric Swalwell and Rep. Jimmy Gomez filed suit seeking, among other things, damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress. coming out of January 6th.

Today, former federal prosecutor Joyce Vance spoke about the unique opportunity that these suits provide and why they are an ingenious way to force Trump to talk on pain of perjury:

“These civil cases are a very interesting aspect of the search for accountability. We’ve seen the flawed impeachment procedure, which failed to hold him accountable despite evidence. We’re looking at the criminal process and criminal investigations ongoing, too early to conclude whether that would ultimately reach former President Trump and his inner circle. These civil cases are a direct and potentially more quick route for the American people to gain the truth …”

“… Only one of the claims in this complaint have to survive a motion to dismiss, an early preliminary motion that the defendants will file in order to begin the discovery process, and that’s part of the legal proceedings in the civil case where a litigant like Representative Swalwell has the ability to take depositions to ask for documents where there’s actually an obligation that the defendants respond under oath.”

Remember, if criminal charges are ever filed against Trump, he has the same rights as anyone else and cannot be forced to answer a question. But in any civil suit, Trump must answer the questions or invoke the 5th Amendment, which would be highly problematic in both defending the case and with respect to his reputation.

Now we just need to see if the suits survive immediate motions to dismiss or whether the judge allows discovery to proceed.

****
Peace, y’all
Jason
[email protected] and on Twitter @JasonMiciak