Good morning, and welcome to the Epoch Times News Brief. I’m Bill Thomas.
Supreme Court Announces Update in Trump Immunity Case
The Supreme Court has scheduled April 25 as the date for oral arguments regarding former President Donald Trump’s claim of immunity from prosecution in his D.C. trial.The presidential immunity case will likely feature big questions about various constitutional provisions and the delineation of authority between different aspects of the American government.
In his immunity appeal, President Trump argued that Congress had authority that superseded involvement by the judiciary. His brief warned that without his interpretation of immunity, presidents would see destructive cycles of recrimination that would hinder their ability to make decisions.
There are disagreements over the pace of the prosecution, with special counsel Jack Smith pushing for a quick trial to expedite the appeal and bypass the usual lower court process, while President Trump and 22 states criticize this process. The court is expected to face public scrutiny and may feel pressure to make a quick decision in order to allow lower court proceedings to continue.
President Trump’s appeal was previously rejected by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, which stated that impeachment was not necessary for criminal prosecution.
This case is the second major one related to President Trump’s conduct on Jan. 6, 2021, and will involve constitutional questions.
While the Constitution doesn’t explicitly grant presidential immunity, its provisions have been interpreted to protect certain forms of presidential decision-making from judicial review. Whatever the court decides, it will likely set a landmark precedent that could affect future elections and decisions by all three branches of the federal government.
Manhattan DA Pushes Back Trump’s Request
President Trump’s legal team is seeking to exclude the testimony of Michael Cohen, a key witness, in an upcoming criminal trial.Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office responded to this attempt, criticizing the argument as unsupportable and reading more like a press release than a legal filing.
The trial, scheduled for March 25, marks the first instance of a sitting or former American president facing criminal prosecution. President Trump has pleaded not guilty to the 34 counts of falsifying business records he was indicted for in April last year. The charges primarily focus on falsifying business records rather than directly relating to the 2016 election interference that prosecutors allege.
The president’s attorneys argue that Mr. Cohen’s testimony would be inadmissible evidence and accused prosecutors of trying to interfere with President Trump’s potential 2024 presidential campaign. However, prosecutors dismissed these claims as intentionally inflammatory and meritless, stating that Mr. Cohen’s testimony will be corroborated by extensive evidence, including documentary evidence and other witness testimony.
Mr. Cohen previously admitted to lying under oath to Congress during a New York civil fraud trial involving President Trump. He told the court that he lied when he told Congress that neither then-candidate Trump nor a former Trump Organization chief financial officer told him to inflate numbers on personal financial statements.
However, New York Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron, who was presiding over the civil case, determined that Mr. Cohen was a “credible” witness despite noting that his testimony was “significantly compromised.”
The defense also sought to exclude testimony from Stormy Daniels, an adult film actress, citing the intention to offer false and prejudicial testimony.
Prosecutors criticized this request, calling it sweeping and based on improper speculation. President Trump has denied the alleged affair and charged the indictment as politically motivated.
The trial’s presiding judge, Justice Juan Merchan, has yet to rule on President Trump’s requests.
Nikki Haley Ends 2024 Presidential Bid But Does Not Endorse Trump
Nikki Haley, a Republican presidential candidate, ended her bid for the 2024 election without endorsing President Trump.In her speech in Charleston, South Carolina, she expressed gratitude for the support she received but stated that it was time to suspend her campaign. Ms. Haley acknowledged that President Trump was likely to become the Republican nominee and congratulated him, but did not formally endorse him.
President Trump responded to her departure with a statement on his social media platform, encouraging her to continue fighting in the race.
Ms. Haley entered the race in 2023, becoming the first major GOP candidate after President Trump. She struggled initially but gained traction with her stance on abortion, which drew support from moderate voters. That position also drew criticism from some conservatives, who found it to be inconsistent with Ms. Haley’s claims of being “unapologetically pro-life.” But for those with a more liberal stance on the issue, her comments were seen as an olive branch. She achieved third place in Iowa and won in the District of Columbia.
Ms. Haley faced controversies during her campaign, including failing to acknowledge slavery as the primary cause of the Civil War in a town hall event and stating that the United States was not a racist country. Her age-based criticism of President Trump and President Joe Biden also turned off some Republican voters.
The former U.N. ambassador announced on March 6 that she is suspending her 2024 presidential campaign following President Trump’s near sweep of the Super Tuesday primaries, where he won 14 of 15 contests.
Fani Willis Met With Kamala Harris Before Trump Indictment: Attorney
According to a lawyer representing a Trump co-defendant in Fulton County, Georgia, District Attorney Fani Willis allegedly met with Vice President Kamala Harris before indicting President Trump.This claim was made during a Georgia state Senate hearing investigating allegations that Ms. Willis had an inappropriate relationship with her special counsel, Nathan Wade, and that she obtained improper benefits from the arrangement.
Both Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade acknowledged their relationship but denied any financial benefit or that it began before 2022.
Furthermore, co-defendant Michael Roman’s lawyer, Ashleigh Merchant, presented White House records showing that Ms. Willis had a meeting with Ms. Harris and Atlanta Mayor Andre Dickens on Feb. 28, 2023, months prior to the indictments handed down in August of that year. Ms. Merchant mentioned that access to the White House is highly regulated.
Ms. Willis’s office and the White House have not yet commented on these allegations. Judge Scott McAfee stated that he will decide in the next two weeks whether to remove Ms. Willis from the case due to the relationship.
Lawyers for President Trump and his co-defendants accused Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade of lying about the timeline of their relationship and argued that keeping Ms. Willis on the case undermines public trust in the prosecution. Ms. Willis’s office stated that there is no evidence of financial benefit and accused the lawyers of speculation and harassment.
If Ms. Willis is removed from the case, it raises questions about the future of the Trump case and whether the charges against him and others will be dropped.
New Bill Would Strip COVID-19 Vaccine Manufacturers of Liability Protection
Legislation introduced on March 5 would allow Americans injured by COVID-19 vaccines to sue the manufacturers by removing liability protections.The bill proposed by Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) seeks to retroactively remove the protections provided by the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act. Currently, the PREP Act protects vaccine manufacturers and administrators from liability, except in cases of death or serious injury caused by “willful misconduct.” The protection even covers individuals who believed they were protected, even if they were not.
The new bill aims to empower Americans and provide justice for those who have suffered vaccine injuries. Despite the federal Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program, which provides compensation for vaccine injuries, only 11 people have been compensated as of January. Most claims have been rejected, including those diagnosed with vaccine injuries by their doctors. A lawsuit filed in U.S. court in Monroe, Louisiana, has challenged the constitutionality of the program, describing it as a “kangaroo court.”
Pfizer and Moderna have not commented on the bill, while a spokesperson for the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America warned that changing the liability framework could hinder future responses to public health threats.
The bill already has 19 co-sponsors and support from organizations like Children’s Health Defense, who believe it will bring accountability to vaccine damages and fatalities.
Each of these stories, from courtroom dramas to political shifts and legislative debates, reflects the dynamic and ever-evolving nature of our national discourse.
Thank you for tuning in to the Epoch Times News Brief. Join us next time as we continue to explore the stories that matter most.
