Staff Reports
Former President Donald Trump’s legal woes are evolving into a saga worthy of a bad courtroom drama as he embarks on a potentially jaw-dropping $100 million lawsuit against the Justice Department. The suit stems from the infamous FBI raid on his Mar-a-Lago estate last August, which has attorneys for Trump spinning narratives of political vendettas and malicious prosecutions, allegations aimed at changing electoral outcomes faster than a Democrat can say “Russian collusion.”
Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, has weighed in on this legal escapade, indicating that the former president might find this particular legal battle as welcome as a porcupine in a balloon factory. The claim has been filed as a precursor to a full-on lawsuit, which Trump’s team hopes will shed light on what they believe to be an overreach by the DOJ. While the claim hints at a conspiracy to prevent Trump from reclaiming the White House in 2024, Turley suggests that navigating through the legal system will be akin to swimming upstream in a river of molasses.
Jonathan Turley says ‘odds are against’ Trump in suit against DOJ over Mar-a-Lago raid https://t.co/FVx0HVu4A9
— Bo Snerdley (@BoSnerdley) August 13, 2024
Why such skepticism about Trump’s chances? The reason lies within the arcane and often perplexing realm of legal immunity. According to Turley, the DOJ holds a shield of immunity for its discretionary actions. In layman’s terms, this means that the Justice Department may wade through the murky waters of legality without much fear of being held accountable for its actions. With this in mind, Trump’s attorneys will need more than just rhetoric to make their case stick; they’ll need a miracle and perhaps the luck of a thousand four-leaf clovers.
Adding spice to the legal stew is U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon’s prior dismissal of charges against Trump in another related matter back in July. Cannon ruled that the appointment of Special Counsel Jack Smith was questionable at best. While this was a win, the judicial rollercoaster didn’t end there, as the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals promptly overturned her ruling. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has stuck its nose in the fray, declaring that personal motives could cloud the legal protections typically afforded to a sitting president. In simple terms, if Trump’s actions can be perceived as personal rather than official, he might find himself on shaky ground.
Despite all the legal maneuvering, including moments of cooperation with the FBI prior to the raid, Turley cautions that these factors might not be enough to tilt the scales. The deck is seemingly stacked in favor of the Justice Department, which must feel like a recurring bad dream for the former president and his legal team. Any hope that Trump can sidestep the DOJ’s robust defense may be just that—hope rather than a concrete legal strategy.
As this political drama continues to unfold, the odds are certainly not in Trump’s favor. A legal battle against the DOJ is like bringing a rubber knife to a gunfight; it might be entertaining, but it’s not going to win any medals. With all the twists and turns ahead, one can only watch and wait as this legal soap opera unfolds.
