WilmerHale attorneys have filed an amicus brief in the case of United States v. Donald J. Trump, which is currently pending in the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.

The amicus brief, co-written by counsel Seth Waxman, Todd Zubler, Colleen Campbell, Nathaniel Reisinger, David Levine and Kyle Edwards, explains why the immunity sought by former President Trump in connection with his criminal prosecution for alleged election interference is “inconsistent with our Constitution.”

The brief supports the District Court’s December 1 ruling that former President Trump’s request to be granted absolute immunity from federal criminal prosecution for all acts taken while in office has no constitutional basis.

The authors also point to potential severe consequences if the ruling is overturned, asserting that to provide the former President absolute immunity would be a “frontal assault on the Constitution’s Executive Vesting Clause” and “would subvert the bedrock principle that no person is above the law.”

The brief explains that even if past President were hypothetically provided limited immunity, it could not conceivably reach Trump’s alleged crimes, because the “defendant allegedly acted to thwart the peaceful transfer of power that the Constitution demands” and “[a]ny immunity that would shield those acts would contravene fundamental constitutional provisions.”

The amici was joined by Democracy 21 and 16 former prosecutors, elected officials and constitutional lawyers who served presidents from Nixon to Trump and was the subject of New York Times and Washington Post articles.

Read the full Amicus Brief.