A year ago, Donald Trump was still facing four criminal indictments: two at the federal level, one in New York State, and one in Georgia.
But after Trump defeated Democratic nominee Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential election, then-special counsel Jack Smith asked Judge Tayna Chutkan to dismiss his election interference case — citing the U.S. Department of Justice's (DOJ) longtime policy against prosecuting a sitting president. And Smith abandoned his appeal of Judge Aileen Cannon's dismissal of his classified documents case.
Justice Juan Merchan went ahead with the sentencing on 34 counts in Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg Jr.'s hush money/falsified business records case, but he didn't impose jail time, probation or even a fine. Meanwhile, Fulton County, Georgia Fani Willis' election interference/RICO case against Trump appears to be dead.
READ MORE: 'Where did he get this idea?' MAGA think tank behind 'reckless and ruthless' Trump policy
In an article published on January 24, however, Salon's Tatyana Tandanpolie stresses that according to legal experts, civil lawsuits may give Smith and others who prosecuted Trump the last word.
"President Donald Trump's return to the Oval Office this week comes much to the dismay of those who hoped his criminal prosecutions would result in accountability for his alleged crimes," Tandanpolie explains. "It is also a disappointment to those who hoped that merely seeing the flurry of criminal charges against him, especially former special counsel Jack Smith's 2020 election subversion case, would convince enough Americans of the threat he poses to democracy."
Tandanpolie continues, "But in the wake of Trump's now-moot criminal cases in Washington, Florida and Georgia, alongside his unconditional discharge in the New York hush money case, a spate of lawsuits are still seeking to hold Trump, the Proud Boys and other defendants to account for the role they played in the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol."
One of those civil lawsuits is Smith v. Trump, which, the Salon journalist notes, was filed "on behalf of eight U.S. Capitol police officers harmed during the January 6 riot."
READ MORE: GOP rep proposes 'third term' constitutional amendment for Trump: report
Former federal prosecutor Barbara McQuade, often featured as a legal analyst on MSNBC, points out that according to Clinton v. Jones, sitting presidents are not exempt from civil lawsuits — which, she said, could become "the most important cases out there" given the demise of the criminal cases against Trump.
McQuade told Salon, "With courts making findings that this activity was within Trump's capacity as a candidate and not in his capacity as president, it could be that the civil cases are where we see liability."
Similarly, Edward Caspar of the Lawyer's Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, told Salon, "Civil liability is really the only way that can address (the harm to officers), and it might be the last leg standing. But it's certainly one of the most important means of securing accountability for the events of January 6."
READ MORE: 'Bring it on': Dem knocked to floor in bar fracas between Kansas councilman, legislator
Read Tatyana Tandanpolie's full article for Salon at this link.