U.S. President Donald Trump in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, D.C., March 31, 2026. REUTERS/Evan Vucci
With its controversial 6-3 ruling in Trump v. the United States, the U.S. Supreme Court's GOP-appointed hard-right supermajority ruled that U.S presidents enjoy absolute immunity from prosecution for "official" acts in office but not for "unofficial" acts. Donald Trump applauded the ruling. But on Tuesday, March 31, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta — applying that standard — ruled that Trump's speech at a January 6, 2021 rally in Washington, D.C. was political in nature and therefore, is not protected from civil lawsuits related to the attack on the U.S. Capitol Building.
According to Politico journalists Josh Gerstein and Kyle Cheney, Mehta "delivered a serious setback" to Trump "in long-running civil lawsuits seeking to hold him liable for the violence at the Capitol on January 6, 2021."
Mehta, they note, "ruled that evidence produced so far in the litigation brought by police officers and Democratic lawmakers indicated that Trump's speech at the Ellipse that day was political in nature and not subject to the immunity the Supreme Court has found for a president's official acts."
Gerstein, in a March 31 post on X, former Twitter, noted that Mehta's "ruling could lead to a trial but appeal could lead to year-plus more delay."
Attorney Joseph Sellers, who is representing the Democratic lawmakers suing Trump in civil court, is applauding Mehta's ruling.
Sellers told Politico, "We're very pleased that the court recognized that President Trump cannot avoid accountability for his conduct on January 6, 2021. This decision, if it holds up, is going to pave the way to a trial in federal district court on these claims."