Future Retirement Success
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks

Future Retirement Success

Politics

Federal appeals court denies Michael Cohen’s attempt to revive lawsuit against Trump

by January 3, 2024
January 3, 2024
Federal appeals court denies Michael Cohen’s attempt to revive lawsuit against Trump

A federal appeals court on Tuesday denied Michael Cohen’s attempt to revive his lawsuit against former President Trump in which he claimed he was jailed in retaliation for writing a tell-all book.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan said in an order that it would not revive the lawsuit. A lower-court judge had tossed out the lawsuit, ruling that the law did not seem to provide a damages remedy for most claims that someone was jailed in retaliation for their criticisms of a president.

The court of appeals on Tuesday ruled that Cohen already obtained relief by getting a judge to order his release from imprisonment to home confinement weeks after he was imprisoned, when the government claimed he violated severe restrictions on his public communications.

The court said the law did not provide an outlet for more relief than that.

Cohen served more than a year of his three-year sentence in federal prison after pleading guilty in 2018 to tax evasion, campaign finance charges and making a false statement to Congress.

Cohen, however, told Fox News Digital he will bring the challenge to the Supreme Court.

‘The outcome is wrong if democracy is to prevail,’ Cohen told Fox News Digital. ‘A writ of habeas corpus cannot be the only consequence to stop a rogue president from weaponizing the Department of Justice from locking up his/her critics in prison because they refuse to waive their first amendment right.’

He added: ‘We will be filing a writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court.’

In a statement Tuesday, Cohen’s attorney Jon-Michael Doherty of Gilbert LLP said they plan to take the fight to ‘the highest court in the land.’

‘While we are of course disappointed in the Second Circuit’s ruling, our consistent expectation has been that this novel issue involving the appropriate remedy against a rogue President who seeks to use the prisons to silence his personal critics would need to be addressed by the United States Supreme Court,’ he said. ‘In America, an adequate remedy against this sort of abuse of power must deter future misconduct by federal officials.’

He added: ‘We look forward to taking the fight for Americans’ right to speak freely about their government without fear of imprisonment to the highest court in the land.’

Cohen filed the initial lawsuit in 2020.

Meanwhile, Trump attorney Alina Habba told Fox News Digital that they are ‘very pleased with today’s ruling.’ 

‘Mr. Cohen’s lawsuit was doomed from its inception,’ Habba told Fox News Digital. ‘We will continue to fight against any frivolous suits aimed at our client.’

Cohen had been released on furlough on May 21, 2020, to serve out the remainder of his three-year sentence — but allegedly failed to take necessary steps to finalize that transfer. In a statement, the Bureau of Prisons charged that instead of complying with the terms of the U.S. Probation Office’s Federal Location Monitoring (FLM) program, Cohen was obstinate.

At the time, the Bureau of Prisons said: ‘Any assertion that the decision to remand Michael Cohen to prison was a retaliatory action is patently false.’

The Bureau of Prisons also said that during the process of transitioning to home confinement, Cohen ‘refused to agree to the terms of the program, specifically electronic monitoring.’

The agency said he was ‘argumentative’ and ‘was attempting to dictate the conditions of his monitoring, including conditions relating to self-employment, access to media, use of social media and other accountability measures.’ Cohen also allegedly ‘refused to acknowledge and sign the conditions of his transfer of home confinement and was remanded into custody.’

‘While it is not uncommon for BOP to place certain restrictions on inmates’ contact with the media, Mr. Cohen’s refusal to agree to those conditions here played no role whatsoever in the decision to remand him to secure custody nor did his intent to publish a book,’ the bureau said at the time.

In July 2020, U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of New York Alvin Hellerstein said the move to put Cohen back in prison was ‘retaliatory’ and claimed it was related to his forthcoming tell-all book. Hellerstein noted that probation officers had demanded Cohen agree to avoid engagement with the media, then cuffed him when he didn’t agree.

‘I’ve never seen such a clause in 21 years of being a judge and sentencing people. How can I take any other inference but that it was retaliatory?’ Hellerstein said at the time.

The Justice Department, at the time, led by then-Attorney General Bill Barr, denied the move was retaliatory, as did the Bureau of Prisons.

The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
0
FacebookTwitterGoogle +Pinterest
previous post
Trump starts 2024 in ‘strongest possible position’ in Republican presidential primary race
next post
Pioneering the Future: Google and Cambridge Join Forces for Responsible AI Innovation

You may also like

Supreme Court upholds looming TikTok ban

January 17, 2025

THAT’S WEIRD? California Officials REFUSE to Allow Paul...

November 7, 2022

Trump budget bill could see ‘roughly’ $1 trillion...

February 5, 2025

Longtime Joe Biden aide appears under House subpoena...

July 18, 2025

EU Leaders Propose Cut of 7.5 Billion Euros...

September 18, 2022

Another Ghastly Day In NYC: Thief Robs Dead...

October 9, 2022

JD Vance agrees to debate Tim Walz on...

August 15, 2024

Former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg sentenced to...

January 10, 2023

‘Secret reports’ reveal how government worked to ‘censor...

November 7, 2023

US will ‘have to’ send weapons to Ukraine,...

July 8, 2025

    Get free access to all of the retirement secrets and income strategies from our experts! or Join The Exclusive Subscription Today And Get the Premium Articles Acess for Free

    By opting in you agree to receive emails from us and our affiliates. Your information is secure and your privacy is protected.

    Recent Posts

    • What James Carville doesn’t get about voter priorities

      July 25, 2025
    • Fields of fortune: Why farmland remains a tax-efficient safe haven — for now

      July 25, 2025
    • UK firms cutting staff at fastest pace since February as economic pressures mount

      July 25, 2025
    • River Island faces collapse unless landlords approve urgent rescue plan

      July 25, 2025
    • LVMH suffers steep drop in fashion sales as wealthy consumers tighten belts

      July 25, 2025
    • EU fails to reduce 50% steel tariff in draft US trade deal as industry warns of ‘catastrophic’ impact

      July 25, 2025

    Categories

    • Business (8,573)
    • Investing (2,145)
    • Politics (16,193)
    • Stocks (3,227)
    • About us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms & Conditions

    Disclaimer: futureretirementsuccess.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively “The Company”) do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

    Copyright © 2025 futureretirementsuccess.com | All Rights Reserved