Former Trump attorney Michael Cohen is seeking Supreme Court intervention in his case, alleging the Trump administration retaliated against him for criticizing the former president by sending him back to prison.
Michael Cohen, former President Donald Trump's controversial attorney, has filed a petition to the Supreme Court, seeking to overturn lower court rulings and establish a remedy for citizens who face retaliatory imprisonment by government officials.
Cohen's claim stems from his alleged re-imprisonment in solitary confinement in July 2020, which he claims was orchestrated by Trump and Justice Department officials as retribution for writing and publishing a tell-all book criticizing the Trump presidency.
Cohen Petitions Supreme Court to Curb Executive Retaliation Against Critics
In his petition, Cohen argues that presidents and their subordinates cannot be allowed to use the prison system to silence their critics. He cites the findings of a federal judge who ruled that the Trump administration violated Cohen's First Amendment rights by sending him back to prison.
Cohen's petition is based on the Supreme Court's "Bivens" ruling, which provides citizens with limited legal recourse to sue federal officials who violate their constitutional rights. The 2nd U.S. Court of Appeals ruled against Cohen's initial claim, arguing that Bivens does not provide damages and that Cohen's ultimate release to home confinement constituted legal relief.
Cohen Petitions Supreme Court to Curb Executive Retaliation Against Critics
However, Cohen's petition contends that the courts have yet to rule on remedies or methods to prevent future violations. He urges the Supreme Court to address this issue and provide guidance on how to hold officials accountable for such violations.
Through his attorney, Jon-Michael Dougherty, Cohen emphasizes that the case extends beyond his personal experience and raises concerns about the erosion of freedom of speech and the protection of citizens against constitutional violations by the executive branch.
Cohen Petitions Supreme Court to Curb Executive Retaliation Against Critics
Trump's lawyer, Alina Habba, maintains that Cohen's suit lacks merit and that the Supreme Court has previously ruled against Bivens suits in similar contexts. Trump himself has suggested he could prosecute political opponents and imprison prosecutors involved in cases against him, despite later downplaying these comments.
Dougherty counters that Trump's statements illustrate the potential for revenge and the need for the Supreme Court's intervention. He argues that the court has a duty to accept the case due to its unique constitutional significance.
Cohen Petitions Supreme Court to Curb Executive Retaliation Against Critics
If the Supreme Court agrees to hear Cohen's petition, four of the nine justices must vote in favor. The case could have far-reaching implications for the balance of power between the executive branch and individual citizens.
Cohen's petition has drawn mixed reactions. Some legal analysts believe it has a slim chance of success, while others argue that the court may be compelled to address the important constitutional issues it raises.
Cohen Petitions Supreme Court to Curb Executive Retaliation Against Critics
The Supreme Court is yet to rule on the petition, and it remains to be seen whether the justices will grant certiorari and take up Cohen's case for review.
