Trump-Appointed Judges Once Again Rule Against Ally of Former President

An Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals three-judge panel, two of whom were appointed by Donald Trump, unanimously rejected a claim by Republican Senator Lindsey Graham that he is immune from being questioned in an investigation related to the former president's efforts to overturn the 2020 election.

Graham must now provide testimony before a grand jury investigating whether Trump and some of his top allies attempted to influence the 2020 election in Georgia.

The panel, which included Trump appointees Judge Kevin Newsom and Judge Britt Grant, ruled that Graham can be questioned by Fulton County prosecutors about his conversations with Georgia officials, pushing back against his claim that he is protected by privilege under speech and debate clause, according to Politico.

Prosecutors want to ask Graham about his phone call with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger that happened weeks after the 2020 presidential election, the Associated Press reported. Raffensperger said that Graham asked about whether he had the authority to reject certain absentee ballots.

This is not the first time that Trump-appointed judges haven't sided with the former president. In September, the 11th Circuit Court, which included Grant and Judge Andrew Brasher, along with Robin Rosenbaum, a judge appointed by President Barack Obama overturned a decision by Trump-appointed Judge Aileen Cannon.

Cannon previously ruled to temporarily block the Department of Justice from reviewing classified documents retrieved from Trump's Mar-a-Lago home.

"It is self-evident that the public has a strong interest in ensuring that the storage of the classified records did not result in 'exceptionally grave damage to the national security,'" they wrote at the time, according to Voice of America.

Assistant professor of law at Georgia State University Anthony Michael Kreis told Newsweek on Friday that some of the judiciary, who were once loyal to Trump, are not taking an extra step now to help the former president.

"It does seem apparent that the judiciary for the most part, much like some of Trump's political allies, are not going out of their way to help the former president," Kreis said. "As investigations continue to heat up between the Fulton County Special Purpose Grand Jury and the Mar-a-Lago documents and more evidence is publicly unearthed, I suspect that trend will only accelerate."

The 11th Circuit panel stated in its Thursday ruling that prosecutors can ask Graham questions about his "coordination with the Trump campaign regarding its post-election efforts in Georgia, public statements regarding the 2020 election, and efforts to 'cajole' or 'exhort' Georgia election officials—were not legislative activities."

Graham's lawyers argued in July that the senator didn't interfere in the 2020 election in Georgia, the Associated Press reported. The argument was part of an effort to push back against a subpoena asking for Graham's testimony in the investigation.

Graham denied any wrongdoing and claimed that his position as a senator protects him from testifying in the Georgia investigation, but the federal court argued against that on Thursday.

"Senator Graham has failed to demonstrate that this approach will violate his rights under the Speech and Debate Clause," the court panel argued, adding that the Republican senator will not be questioned about informal legislative investigations.

"As the court determined, there is significant dispute about whether his phone calls with Georgia election officials were legislative investigations at all," the court document read.

Graham lawyers previously said that they will appeal to the Supreme Court if the appeals court refuses to intervene, according to Politico.

Newsweek reached out to Graham's media office for comment.