Judge Grants Trump Immunity in Pennsylvania Election Worker’s Lawsuit

A Pennsylvania judge granted former President Donald Trump presidential immunity in a lawsuit a state election worker brought against him over statements he made about the integrity of the 2020 election.

James Savage, a voting machine supervisor in Delaware County, Pennsylvania, filed two lawsuits against Donald Trump, arguing the former president’s public comments about the 2020 election made him the subject of “hatred” and death threats, which ultimately resulted in him having two heart attacks.

Savage alleged that Trump, Rudy Giuliani, two Delaware County poll watchers, and others “conspired to defame him and place him in a false light by publicly and falsely claiming that he tampered with the 2020 Presidential election results.”

In particular, Savage pointed to statements Trump made during a Pennsylvania State Senate Majority Policy Committee hearing in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, on November 5, 2020, a tweet sent out on November 27, 2020, and a letter sent to the House of Representatives January 6 Committee.

As the Philadelphia Inquirer reported at the time:

A Nov. 27, 2020, Trump tweet that was referenced in the suit made claims of missing USB drives and tens of thousands of votes uploaded for Biden. There is no evidence that widespread voter fraud occurred in Pennsylvania in the 2020 election.

At a Dec. 1 news conference the Trump campaign framed as a platform for whistleblowers to speak out, Stenstrom would reiterate the claims he’d made at the committee hearing, saying he saw “the voting machine warehouse supervisor for Delaware County” upload votes for Biden.

Savage says his name didn’t need to be mentioned outright for others to realize he was the one being accused of election fraud.

On Monday, Judge Michael E. Erdos of the Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas granted Trump presidential and legislative immunity pertaining to his statements in 2020, throwing out the case against him.

Trump’s team said they are “pleased” with the judge’s decision to grant immunity.

“We are pleased with the Court’s decision to honor the long-standing principle of Presidential Immunity. Today, the Court made it clear that it is well within the President’s discretion to address the integrity of our election without fear of liability. We expect that the rest of Mr. Savage’s claims will similarly be disposed of as they are without merit,” Trump attorney Alina Habba said in a statement.

Judge Erdos noted that Trump’s public comments about election integrity were “undoubtedly a matter of great public concern” and that his remarks, on their face, “dealt with the cornerstone of our democracy elections.”

“Speaking to the public on matters of public concern is part of a President’s official duties. Indeed, the President’s use of the ‘bully pulpit’ to address the Nation has historically been an important feature of the office,” Erdos wrote.

The court refused to look into Trump’s mindset or motivation behind his comments on election integrity.

“Trump’s assertions of course stood to benefit him personally. The stakes could not have been higher with respect to his political future and his status as ‘leader of the free world.’ But that does not mean that they were outside the ‘outer perimeter of his official responsibility,’” Erdos continued.

“Determining Trump’s mindset when he said what he said is not the role of the Court,” Erdos wrote, adding, “Neither is it the Court’s place to assess the wisdom of his comments.”

“Other legal proceedings may examine the propriety of his statements and actions while he was the President and whether, as the plaintiffs in this and other cases contend, it was this conduct which served as the actual threat to our democracy,” the judge concluded. “But this case is not the proper place to do so. Here, Trump is entitled to Presidential immunity.”

Jordan Dixon-Hamilton is a reporter for Breitbart News. Write to him at jdixonhamilton@breitbart.com or follow him on Twitter.