A federal judge opened the door for an appeals court to decide whether President Donald Trump's Jan. 6 tweet — sent as rioters stormed the Capitol — was protected by presidential immunity.

U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta ruled Wednesday that he would not reverse his earlier decision shielding the tweet from a civil lawsuit filed under the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871, a Reconstruction-era law that bars conspiracies to prevent members of Congress from carrying out their duties.

But Mehta certified the question for interlocutory review — allowing plaintiffs to challenge the immunity ruling at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit now, without waiting for the full case to conclude. Their deadline to file is Aug. 5.

The suit was originally filed in February 2021 by Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS), according to court records. Thompson later withdrew as a plaintiff to chair the House Select Committee investigating Jan. 6, and former Rep. Barbara Lee of California became the lead plaintiff. The complaint accuses Trump of conspiring with former personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, the Proud Boys, and the Oath Keepers to block Congress from certifying the 2020 election results.

At issue is a tweet Trump sent at 2:24 p.m. on Jan. 6, as rioters were breaching the Capitol. The tweet said: "Mike Pence didn't have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution."

In March, Mehta ruled the tweet was an official act and therefore immune from civil liability.

His reasoning, per Wednesday's ruling, was that moments before Trump sent it, White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and White House Counsel Pat Cipollone had walked into the dining room to urge Trump to stop the riot. Trump refused — and then posted the tweet.

Mehta acknowledged the tweet "arguably poured gasoline on the fire" but said that did not change the analysis.

"Any act taken by the president — no matter how outlandish (like organizing a poker game) or plainly office-seeking (like firing a campaign pollster) — would become official simply because they occurred after the President received some advice about not engaging in such acts from government officials," plaintiffs argued in their reconsideration filing.

Mehta rejected the argument but agreed the question was close enough to warrant appellate review. Plaintiffs must file their notice of appeal no later than Aug. 5, with the D.C. Circuit's opening brief due Aug. 10.

President Donald Trump's legal team demanded writer E. Jean Carroll return the $5.6 million judgment a federal court ordered him to pay her for sexual abuse and defamation, according to reports.

The Independent reported Trump's legal team filed an emergency injunction on Tuesday. His team hopes the Supreme Court will grant what they characterize as a "legal Hail Mary" by reversing the judgment and returning the funds.

The court-ordered payment was issued on July 9 through a court-controlled escrow account.

Carroll's attorneys strongly opposed the maneuver, stating in a legal filing that "rather than accept the reality that he had lost, [Trump] has engaged in a series of maneuvers trying desperately to forestall payment."

Additionally, they argued the court-ordered payment "should have been the end of this case," asserting, "The judgment here is final, the money has already been disbursed, and Carroll is entitled to keep it."

"But Defendant now demands yet another unprecedented remedy."

Watch the video below.

Prosecutors on the Justice Department's voter roll seizure team told a journalist's lawyers they won't put anything in writing because their own words might be used against them in court.

The admission came in a federal case against independent journalist Georgia Fort, who was arrested at her Minneapolis home in January while covering an Immigration and Customs Enforcement protest at a St. Paul church, according to the Press Freedom Tracker.

Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon and then-Attorney General Pam Bondi personally flew to Minnesota to present the case to a grand jury after career prosecutors in the state refused to bring it, national security reporter Marcy Wheeler reported on her site emptywheel.

Wheeler added on Bluesky that prosecutors refusing to communicate in writing was "wildly suspect." Under Minnesota Rule 8.4, it is professional misconduct for a lawyer to "engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation."

A July 2 letter filed in federal court by Fort's attorney Matthew Ebert memorialized a call with prosecutor Ned Hedley, who works for Dhillon, the day before.

"The government does not intend to respond to our correspondence in writing, out of the concern expressed on the call that what it represents to us could be put before the Court and/or otherwise used against it," Ebert wrote, capturing Hedley's position.

Prosecutors said they would not address what the superseding indictment called "significant misstatements" about Fort's conduct. They would not identify what evidence supports the allegations against her. They also would not notify the judges to whom they had submitted admittedly false testimony — in at least 15 search warrant affidavits, the filing said.

The government also could not explain why Homeland Security Investigations Agent Timothy Gerber used administrative customs summonses — legal tools designed for import and export investigations, not criminal cases — to obtain Fort's phone records from January through May 2026, emptywheel reported. Records obtained in discovery show T-Mobile responded to one summons with Fort's subscriber information and call logs. Neither document has been produced to Fort's defense team.

Wheeler had previously reported that the government admitted a false claim that Fort had been "chanting" with protesters appeared in eight separate affidavits before at least three judges. A key witness testified that Fort conducted herself as a journalist and posed no threat. Wheeler titled that report "More Evidence that Harmeet Dhillon's Team Fabricated Their Entire Case against Georgia Fort."

"This is all stemming from the fact that I filmed a protest as a member of the media," Fort said during her arrest livestream.

Dhillon's Civil Rights Division is the same team that has sued 30 states and Washington, D.C. in an attempt to seize unredacted voter rolls — including Social Security numbers — and has lost 16 straight court rulings in the effort, Democracy Docket reported.

"I guess I should have put a bet on my prediction that Harmeet's own misconduct would become an issue in this case," Wheeler wrote.

Magistrate Judge Douglas Micko is scheduled to hold a hearing Friday on Fort's bid for grand jury transcripts.