The Supreme Court declines to hear Michael Cohen’s lawsuit against former President Trump, effectively ending his legal battle.
At a Glance
- Supreme Court rejects Cohen’s appeal to revive lawsuit against Trump and federal officials
- Cohen claimed he was wrongfully imprisoned to prevent publication of his book
- Lower courts dismissed Cohen’s claims for monetary damages
- Decision upholds precedent limiting lawsuits against federal officials
Supreme Court Denies Cohen’s Appeal
The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear Michael Cohen’s attempt to revive his lawsuit against former President Donald Trump and federal officials. This decision effectively ends Cohen’s legal pursuit for monetary damages, which he sought based on claims of retaliation and constitutional rights violations. Cohen, Trump’s former personal attorney, alleged he was wrongfully returned to prison in 2020 to prevent him from publishing a book critical of the former president.
The Supreme Court’s refusal to take up the case leaves in place lower court rulings that dismissed Cohen’s lawsuit. These courts cited legal precedents that limit the ability of individuals to sue federal officials for damages related to constitutional violations. The decision highlights the complex balance between executive authority and individual rights within the American legal system.
The Supreme Court rejected an appeal Monday from Michael Cohen, who wanted to hold his former boss and ex-president Donald Trump liable for a jailing he said was retaliation for writing a tell-all memoir. https://t.co/NrDsLiv3H7
— PBS News (@NewsHour) October 21, 2024
Cohen’s Legal Journey and Claims
Michael Cohen’s legal troubles began in 2018 when he was sentenced to three years in prison for multiple federal felonies, including campaign finance violations and lying to Congress. He was initially released to home confinement in May 2020 due to COVID-19 concerns but was returned to prison two months later after challenging restrictions on his media communications and book publication.
“In denying Michael Cohen’s petition, the Supreme Court has stated that the courts will not provide any deterrent for an executive intent on incarcerating its critics in retaliation for their speech.” – Jon-Michael Dougherty
Cohen’s lawsuit, filed in 2021, targeted Trump, former Attorney General William Barr, and various prison officials. He claimed severe conditions during his 16-day re-imprisonment and alleged violations of his constitutional rights, including free speech and protection against illegal seizure and cruel punishment. Despite these claims, both the district court and appeals court found his case legally insufficient.
Supreme Court rejects lawyer Michael Cohen lawsuit against Trump over alleged retaliation https://t.co/rWD2b7ACkr
— Fox News (@FoxNews) October 21, 2024
Implications and Reactions
The Supreme Court’s decision not to hear Cohen’s case has sparked debate about its implications for executive power and individual rights. Cohen’s lawyer, Jon-Michael Dougherty, expressed concern over the ruling, suggesting it could embolden future executives to retaliate against critics without fear of legal consequences.
“Michael Cohen has exhausted every avenue of his pathetic attempt to drag my client into court time and time again. As expected, the Supreme Court has correctly denied Michael Cohen’s petition and he must finally abandon his frivolous and desperate claims.” – Alina Habba
On the other hand, Trump’s lawyer, Alina Habba, dismissed Cohen’s claims as frivolous and desperate, welcoming the Supreme Court’s decision. The Biden administration’s lawyers also urged the justices to deny Cohen’s appeal, further complicating the political landscape surrounding the case.
Ongoing Legal Battles
While this particular legal avenue has closed for Cohen, the broader legal entanglements between him and Trump continue. Cohen recently served as a key witness in Trump’s New York criminal case involving falsified business records related to hush money payments. Trump, for his part, has sued Cohen for allegedly breaching attorney-client confidentiality and spreading falsehoods.
The Supreme Court’s decision in this case, made without detailed reasoning, leaves open questions about the extent of executive power and the recourse available to individuals who believe their rights have been violated by federal officials. As the legal and political landscapes continue to evolve, the implications of this ruling may resonate in future cases involving similar claims against high-ranking government officials.
Sources:
- US Supreme Court won’t hear Michael Cohen bid to revive suit against Donald Trump
- Michael Cohen’s retaliation suit against Trump rejected at Supreme Court
- Supreme Court won’t revive Michael Cohen’s lawsuit against Trump claiming retaliatory imprisonment