DOJ refuses to back Trump's claim that he's immune from civil lawsuits related to the Capitol riot

Trump's speech before the riot "would not be within the outer perimeter of the Office of the President of the United States," the DOJ said.

• The DOJ refused to back Trump's claim that he is absolutely immune from civil suits related to the Capitol riot.
• It asked a federal appeals court to "reject that categorical argument."
• Trump's speech before the riot "would not be within the outer perimeter of the Office of the President of the United States," the DOJ said.

The US Justice Department said in a court filing Thursday that it does not support former President Donald Trump's claim that he is absolutely immune from lawsuits seeking to hold him accountable for the January 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol.

In the US's view, "such incitement of imminent private violence would not be within the outer perimeter of the Office of the President of the United States," the DOJ said in its 32-page filing.

Trump's legal team asked a federal appeals court last year to overturn a lower court ruling that he could be held liable in civil lawsuits connected to the Capitol siege.

"To deny a President immunity from civil damages is no small step. The court well understands the gravity of its decision," US District Judge Amit Mehta wrote in his initial ruling. "But the alleged facts of this case are without precedent, and the court believes that its decision is consistent with the purposes behind such immunity."

In appealing Mehta's ruling, Trump's lawyers said that the "underlying factual dispute regarding the January 6, 2021, violence at the Capitol arouses the passions of many Americans, including members of the bench and bar."

"Consequently, it is especially important to avoid allowing the judicial department to pass judgment on the political statements and discourse of the President of the United States," they added.

The DOJ said in its Thursday filing that Trump's appeal did not challenge the district court's conclusion "that the complaints plausibly allege that his speech instigated the attack on the Capitol."

"Instead, his briefs advance only a single, categorical argument: A President is always immune from any civil suits based on his 'speech on matters of public concern' ... even if that speech also constitutes incitement to imminent private violence. The United States respectfully submits that the Court should reject that categorical argument."

This story is developing. Check back for updates.