Trump team cites First Amendment in challenge to charges in Georgia election interference case
ATLANTA (AP) — The charges against Donald Trump The Georgia election interference case seeks to criminalize political speech and advocacy conduct protected by Donald Trump's lawyer for the former president, Steve Sadow, has argued that the charges against him against him in the Georgia election interference case against him should be dismissed. The case, which was previously overshadowed by accusations of Fani Willis' misuse of her romantic relationship with a special prosecutor. Sadow argued that a sitting president expressing concerns about an election is considered political speech even though it is ultimately false. Prosecutor Donald Wakeford countered that the First Amendment does not protect speech used as an instrument of a crime. The charges against David Shafer, a former Republican Party chairman, relate to his involvement in casting Electoral College votes for Trump by a group of Georgia Republicans despite the state's elections favoring Democrat Joe Biden. The trial has yet to begin, with an alleged date set for August 2020.
Опубликовано : 4 недели назад от The Bharat Express News в Politics
ATLANTA (AP) — The charges against Donald Trump The Georgia election interference case seeks to criminalize political speech and advocacy conduct protected by the First Amendment, a lawyer for the former president said Thursday as he argued the charges should be dismissed.
The hearing before Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee dealt with a petition from Trump and two preliminary motions from co-defendant David Shafer, and focused on technical legal arguments. It marked a return to normality of sorts after the case was rocked by prosecutors’ accusations Fani Willis wrongfully took advantage of her romantic relationship with Nathan Wade, a special prosecutor hired for the case.
“Nothing of fact has been alleged against President Trump that is not political speech,” Trump’s lead attorney, Steve Sadow, told the judge. Sadow said a sitting president expressing concerns about an election is “the height of political speech” and is protected even if what is said is ultimately false.
Prosecutor Donald Wakeford countered that Trump’s statements are not protected by the First Amendment because they were integral to criminal activity.
‘It’s not just that they were false. It’s not like the defendant was dragged into a courtroom because the prosecutor doesn’t like what he said,” Wakeford said, adding that Trump is free to express his opinions and raise legitimate protests. “What he may not do is use his speech, his expression and his statements as part of a criminal conspiracy to violate Georgia’s RICO statute, impersonate government officials, file false documents and make false statements against the government.”
Wakeford pointed out that similar arguments were made and rejected in the federal election interference case against Trump brought by Justice Department special counsel Jack Smith. U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan wrote in a December ruling that “it is well established that the First Amendment does not protect speech used as an instrument of a crime.”
“Defendant is not being prosecuted simply for making false statements… but rather for knowingly making false statements in furtherance of a criminal conspiracy and obstructing the electoral process,” Chutkan wrote.
Willis used Georgia’s Racketeer and Corrupt Organizations Act, a sweeping anti-racketeering statute, to accuse Trump and 18 others of participating in a vast conspiracy to overturn the state’s 2020 election results.
Most of the charges against Shafer, a former Republican Party chairman, relate to his involvement in casting Electoral College votes for Trump by a group of Georgia Republicans, even though the state’s elections favored him. Democrat Joe Biden approved. The charges against Shafer include impersonating a government official, forgery, false statements and writings, and attempting to file false documents.
His attorney, Craig Gillen, argued that the activities Shafer engaged in were lawful at the time and that Schafer acted in accordance with the requirements of the Electoral Count Act. Because a legal challenge to the presidential election results was pending on December 14, 2020, when it came time for electors to meet to cast Georgia’s electoral votes, Gillen said it was up to Congress to determine whether a Democratic or Republican slate of voters would have to be deployed. are counted towards the state. He said this means Shafer and the other Republicans who gathered to cast electoral votes acted appropriately.
Gillen said the accusation that Shafer and others impersonated a government official, namely a presidential elector, does not hold water because electors are not considered government officials. Prosecutor Will Wooten argued that a presidential elector is clearly an office created by law and that Shafer and others were charged for falsely presenting themselves as the state’s official presidential electors.
Gillen also asked that three phrases be deleted from the indictment: “duly chosen and qualified presidential electors,” “fake Electoral College votes” and “lawful electoral votes.” He said these phrases are used to claim that the Democratic slate of voters was valid and the Republican slate was not. He said these are “biased legal conclusions” about issues that should be decided by the judge or jury at trial.
Wooten opposed the move, saying that “every allegation in an indictment is a legal conclusion.”
Trump and the others were charged last year with participating in a scheme to illegally overturn the 2020 presidential election in Georgia, which the Republican incumbent narrowly lost to Biden.
All defendants were charged with violating the anti-racketeering law, along with other alleged crimes. Four people charged in the case have pleaded guilty after reaching deals with prosecutors. Trump and the others have pleaded not guilty. No trial date has been set. Willis has asked for the trial to begin in August.
The allegations that Willis had an inappropriate relationship were examined over several days last month during an evidentiary hearing, which delved into intimate details of Willis and Wade’s personal lives. The judge rejected the defense’s attempts to impeach Willis and her office as long as Wade stepped aside. But McAfee did allow the defendants to seek review of his decision from the state appeals court.
Also this month, the judge dismissed six of the 41 charges in the indictment, including three against Trump, because he found prosecutors did not provide enough details about the alleged crimes.