Rep. Eric Swalwell becomes second lawmaker to SUE Donald Trump for January 6 insurrection – and includes Donald Trump Jr. as a conspirator
- Rep. Eric Swalwell became the second member of Congress to sue former President Donald Trump over the January 6 insurrection
- Swalwell was one of the House impeachment manager and names Donald Trump Jr., Rudy Giuliani and Rep. Mo Brooks as co-conspirators in the suit
- The Swalwell lawsuit follows one filed by Rep. Bennie Thompson and the NAACP, with both using the Ku Klux Klan Act as part of the legal basis
- The KKK Act prohibits violence or intimidation against elected officials from carrying out their constitutional duties
- Swalwell’s suit asks that Trump pay financial damages, but also seeks to make it more difficult for the ex-president to hold rallies similar to ‘Stop the Steal’
Rep. Eric Swalwell became the second lawmaker to sue former President Donald Trump, blaming him for the January 6 insurrection.
Swalwell, who was one of the House’s impeachment managers, filed the suit Friday in D.C. federal court and named Donald Trump Jr., Rudy Giuliani and Rep. Mo Brooks, an Alabama Republican, who spoke at the ‘stop the steal’ rally on the ellipse, as co-conspirators.
Swalwell follows Rep. Bennie Thompson, the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, in suing Trump in the ex-president’s personal capacity for his role in the insurrection.
Rep. Eric Swalwell, one of the House Democrats’ impeachment managers, became the second members of Congress to sue former President Donald Trump and his associates over their roles in the January 6 insurrection
The lawsuit points to former President Donald Trump’s appearance Sunday at the Conservative Political Action Conference and warns he ‘poses a risk of inciting future political violence’ since he spent 10 minutes of his 90-minute speech repeating the so-called ‘big lie’
The lawsuit names Donald Trump Jr. as a co-conspirator
WHAT DOES THE KU KLUX KLAN ACT SAY?
‘If two or more persons in any State or Territory conspire to prevent, by force, intimidation, or threat, any person from accepting or holding any office, trust, or place of confidence under the United States, or from discharging any duties thereof; or to induce by like means any officer of the United States to leave any State, district, or place, where his duties as an officer are required to be performed, or to injure him in his person or property on account of his lawful discharge of the duties of his office, or while engaged in the lawful discharge thereof, or to injure his property so as to molest, interrupt, hinder, or impede him in the discharge of his official duties.’
The House had promptly impeached Trump in the aftermath of January 6, but the Senate was 10 Republican votes shy of convicting the former president on the charge of inciting an insurrection.
Both Thompson and Swalwell used the 1871 Ku Klux Klan Act as part of the legal basis for their lawsuits.
Swalwell’s court filing points to the 1985 revisions to the law, which says that it is a violation when two or more persons conspire to ‘prevent by force, intimidation, or threat, any person from accepting or holding any office, trust or place of confidence in the U.S.’
The law also says it’s illegal to injure a person on account of them discharging their duties for office.
The KKK act was a Reconstruction-era law that was passed in response to the Klan’s violence and prohibits violence or intimidation against elected officials from carrying out their constitutional duties.
Swalwell’s lawsuit uses the same narrative to point a finger at Trump as the Democrats’ impeachment case.
Swalwell’s lawsuit also warns the court that President Trump has continued to ‘spread dangerous lies.’
The California Democrat points to the ex-president’s speech Sunday at the Conservative Political Action Conference.
‘[H]e spent 10 minutes of a 90-minute speech claiming the election was stolen and saying what should be done to make sure it doesn’t happen again,’ the lawsuit says.
The suit says that Trump’s CPAC speech makes clear that ‘he intends to continue insisting that the 2020 election was a massive fraud that requires widespread reform.’
‘In doing all of that, President Trump made clear he poses a risk of inciting future political violence,’ the lawsuit reads.
The suit seeks a financial sum from Trump and his associates, while also asking a judge to make it more difficult for the ex-president to hold rallies.
It asks the judge to order the defendants to ‘provide written notice to the plaintiff no less than seven days before any rally or public event in Washington, D.C., on a day when significant election or election certification activity is taking place, and when the rally is planned to have more than 50 people in attendance, to allow the plaintiff to determine whether to seek relief from the court to prevent further violence or disruption to the proper functioning of the federal government.’