Lawsuit Against Trump Continues As Judge Claims That He Incites Violence

A Kentucky Federal judge recently ruled against a motion from Trump’s attorneys. The motion was an attempt from Trump’s lawyers to throw out a lawsuit issued against the president. The lawsuit alleges that President Trump incited violence against protestors back in March 2016 at one of his campaign rallies in Louisville. 

via Complex:

The lawsuit stems from a campaign rally in Louisville, Kentucky in March 2016. While Trump was in the midst of his “stump speech” — a standard speech prepared by politicians to be given at numerous stops during their campaign tour — he was interrupted by dissenters in the audience. After repeatedly yelling, “get ’em out of here!” to the crowd, the protesters were then punched, shoved, and injured by Trump’s supporters in the crowd.

As part of their defense, President Trump’s legal team attempted to get the case dismissed on grounds of free speech. Judge David J. Hale of the U.S. Circuit Court, who is presiding over the case, ruled against Trump due to stipulations that remove first amendment protections when speech incites violence. You can watch the full speech from the rally in question below:


In his ruling, Hale said there was plenty of evidence that proved the injuries suffered by the protesters could be directly linked to Trump’s words from behind the podium:

“It is plausible that Trump’s direction to ‘get ’em out of here’ advocated the use of force. Unlike the statements at issue in the cases cited by the Trump Defendants, ‘get ’em out of here’ is stated in the imperative; it was an order, an instruction, a command… Based on the allegations of the complaint, which the Court must accept as true, Trump’s statement at least ‘implicitly encouraged the use of violence or lawless action.’”

The legal shutdown is just the latest in a string of defeats for Trump in the court system. Trump’s immigration ban has been shot down by the courts on several occasions already, aided by the fact that top Trump advisors revealed publicly that the legislation would be mostly unchanged after being halted in court the first time.

Nothing at this point really surprises me with this guy. 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *