Judge rejects Democrats case against Trump 2016 campaign

New York, July 31

Democrats’ claims that President Donald Trump’s campaign conspired with Russia were tossed out on Tuesday by a judge who noted there were no allegations that anyone from the campaign stole documents from the Democratic National Committee.

The lawsuit brought by the committee alleged that Trump’s campaign conspired with Russia, WikiLeaks, Trump’s son-in-law and others. Trump’s campaign and lawyers for the other defendants denied the allegations.

US District Judge John G. Koeltl said Russia was “undoubtably” the primary wrongdoer in the alleged criminal enterprise, but the country can’t be sued in US courts except in special circumstances not present in this case.

Meanwhile, he said the actions of the Trump campaign and others were protected by the First Amendment.

“In sum, the DNC does not allege any facts to show plausibly that any of the defendants, other than the Russia Federation, had any role in hacking the DNC’s computers or stealing its information,” Koeltl wrote. “It attributes that conduct only to the Russian Federation.

“And the DNC does not dispute that the documents were of public importance. Therefore, the First Amendment protects the publication of those stolen documents,” the judge said.

The Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, and the American Civil Liberties Union had submitted written arguments supporting defendant WikiLeaks’ request that the lawsuit be tossed.

In support of his findings, Koeltl cited the Pentagon Papers case in which the US Supreme Court concluded that The New York Times and the Washington Post were constitutionally protected when they published stories about a top-secret study that revealed the US government misled the public about the Vietnam War.

In emails, several lawyers for people and groups named in the suit reacted to Koeltl’s decision. Emails seeking comment were sent to attorneys for the DNC.

Grant Smith, a lawyer for longtime Trump friend Roger Stone, said he was pleased the judge “saw through the Democrats’ thin lawsuit. It was always a Hail Mary in the DNC’s attempt to hold people, and in particular our client Roger Stone, responsible for the loss of Hilary Clinton in the 2016 election.”   

Caroline Polisi, representing ex-Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos, said the lawsuit’s claims about her client were “particularly anemic and bordered on the absurd.” Joshua Dratel, an attorney for WikiLeaks, said he was “very gratified with the result, which reaffirms First Amendment principles that apply to journalists across the board, whether they work for large institutions or small independent operations.” — AP