WASHINGTON — Michael Cohen is an unlikely civil rights crusader.
shame and disqualified as lawyer The lawyer has a notorious reputation due to his long association with Donald Trump.
The relationship ended in a high-profile argument. He was eventually sentenced to three years in prison Various charges He admitted it was related to his work for Trump.
Cohen, now an eloquent Trump critic, has aligned himself with civil rights advocates in an attempt to reverse the Supreme Court’s hostility to charges that federal officials violated the Constitution.
Cohen is making a last-ditch effort to revive a lawsuit accusing Trump of sending him back to prison — ending a home confinement arrangement — in retaliation for writing a tell-all book. His appeal is currently before the courts and he is urging judges to change their approach.
The justices are scheduled to discuss whether to hear his case at a regular closed session on Oct. 18.
In an interview via Zoom, Cohen laid out his case in terms of both the broader legal issues of seeking to prevent officials from taking unconstitutional actions and the more specific goal of cutting off Trump’s wings should the Republican stand a chance of being re-elected. People win the November election.
“Knowing and knowing Donald Trump, based on his own words, he will not stop without significant deterrent factors,” Cohen said. “Just locking people up doesn’t stop.”
He pointed out that Trump had previously suggested Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under Trump, should be executed for treason.
“If you don’t have a deterrent factor for people who lack a moral compass, what do you end up with? A monarch? A king? A dictator? A head of state?” Cohen said.
Cohen spent 16 days in solitary confinement after refusing to sign a form that prevented him from speaking to the media or posting on social media. He was released when a federal judge ruled that the government retaliated against his desire to exercise his free speech rights by writing and talking about the book.
Cohen subsequently filed a civil rights lawsuit against Trump, former Attorney General William Barr and other officials, seeking damages for, among other things, violations of his Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures.
The Supreme Court has heard only a handful of appeals, and even Cohen’s lawyer Jon-Michael Dougherty acknowledged that his client faces “an uphill battle.”
That’s because in recent years, it has become increasingly difficult for courts to bring civil rights lawsuits against federal officials, based on the 1971 precedent of Bivins v. Six Unidentified Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics.
Most recently, in the 2022 case Egbert v. Burr, the court effectively placed the Bivins claim on life support in a ruling and dismissed the claim against Border Patrol agents.
The decision was widely condemned by lawyers on the left and right who support holding government officials accountable.
Cohen’s Supreme Court filing “is actually a very good illustration of how federal officials can get away with blatant constitutional violations when Bivins has been reduced to nothing, or maybe close to nothing,” said Cohen’s attorney, Patrick Jaco Don’t say it.
As NBC News reported last yearThe 2022 Egbert ruling has been cited hundreds of times by lower court judges who have rejected Bivins’ claims in cases raising a variety of constitutional claims, whether they were excessive force claims against federal law enforcement or federal prisons Allegations of medical neglect by officials.
Cohen’s own case is no different.
Both a New York federal judge and the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Cohen’s claims, citing Egbert’s ruling.
Cohen also faces an unlikely coalition opposing his request: Joe Biden and Donald Trump. The current president’s Department of Justice has submitted a brief Agree with the former president that the Supreme Court should not get involved.
Deputy Attorney General Elizabeth Preloga, representing the Biden administration, noted that Cohen actually got what he wanted when the judge ordered his release from prison.
exist Trump’s briefinghis attorney Alina Haba wrote that the lower court “faithfully applied” Supreme Court precedent in ruling against Cohen.
Even in the unlikely event that Cohen’s case is allowed to move forward, Haba did not respond to a request seeking further comment, writing that Trump would seek immunity from the lawsuit under a 1978 Supreme Court ruling that Protects the President facing civil claims resulting from civil litigation.
The court found in July that Trump relied in part on the ruling’s reasoning. Have some immunity He has been criminally charged for trying to overturn the 2020 election results.
With his chances of victory appearing slim, Cohen described the case in stark terms, comparing his experience to that of critics of Russian President Vladimir Putin who have been criticized for expressing opposition to the government. And was imprisoned.
“The only difference between what Vladimir Putin did to these people and what Donald Trump and Bill Barr did to me is that I didn’t die there,” he said.
