Trump Petitions Supreme Court To Reinstate Lawsuit Against Clinton & DNC Over Russia Claims

Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times,

President Donald Trump asked the Supreme Court on Oct. 9 to revive his dismissed civil lawsuit against Hillary Clinton, the Democratic National Committee (DNC), and others.

The president alleges they conspired to create and spread a false story that his 2016 campaign colluded with Russia.

Lower courts rejected the case and ordered Trump and one of his attorneys, Alina Habba, to pay almost $1 million in sanctions. The trial judge and the appeals court called the lawsuit “frivolous,” saying it had no legal merit and appeared aimed at political grievance rather than a valid claim.

Trump is now asking the nation’s highest court to review the appeals court’s decision upholding both the dismissal and the sanctions.

While he was out of office after losing the 2020 election, Trump initiated the lawsuit in federal court in Florida in March 2022, under a federal racketeering law known as civil RICO. That law allows private individuals to seek damages when they claim someone engaged in a pattern of illegal activities, such as fraud or conspiracy.

The lawsuit targeted Clinton, the DNC, former British spy Christopher Steele, former FBI Director James Comey, and more than two dozen other people. It centered on the so-called Steele dossier, which was opposition research funded by Clinton’s campaign that alleged the Russian government had compromising material on Trump.

Trump’s lawsuit touches on topics covered by two earlier government investigations. Former special counsel Robert Mueller’s 2019 report found no criminal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia. Former special counsel John Durham’s 2023 report criticized the FBI’s handling of its 2016 counterintelligence investigation – codenamed Crossfire Hurricane – into possible Trump campaign contacts with Russia. Durham said the FBI relied too much on uncorroborated tips, including material connected to the Clinton campaign.

Those government reports dealt with criminal and counterintelligence questions. By contrast, Trump’s civil lawsuit is a private damages case governed by different rules. The lower courts held that Trump waited too long to file it under the RICO Act’s time limit.

Dossier Source Scrutiny

Steele’s dossier included claims that the Russian government possessed a salacious video of Trump at a hotel in Moscow. His main source was later revealed to be Igor Danchenko, who was based in the United States and has been investigated by federal agents over possible ties to Russian intelligence.

Attorneys for Trump and Habba wrote in the new petition that Supreme Court review of the case is necessary to protect the institution of the presidency. They said that the decisions by the lower courts reflect “a deeply troubling trend of federal courts using sanctions and disciplinary threats to punish the president and his lawyers for legitimate legal positions that those courts (erroneously) reject.”

“Treating contested advocacy as misconduct corrodes our legal culture, deters representation of controversial clients, and makes constitutional adjudication depend on counsel’s willingness to risk personal liability,” they said.

They alleged in the lawsuit that in the months leading up to the 2016 election, Clinton conspired with allies to discredit him with a “false narrative” that he and his campaign engaged in collusion with Russia, according to the petition. The suit alleged several claims, including racketeering and a “conspiracy to commit injurious falsehood.”

Trump defeated Clinton in 2016 and went on to serve in the presidency from January 2017 to January 2021. Trump later regained the presidency by defeating Democratic candidate Kamala Harris, the sitting vice president, in 2024.

In September 2022, U.S. District Judge Donald Middlebrooks threw out Trump’s lawsuit against Clinton on multiple grounds, including that Trump waited too long to pursue some of the claims. Middlebrooks compared Trump’s lawsuit to a “two-hundred-page political manifesto outlining his grievances against those that have opposed him.” The judge later imposed sanctions on Trump and Habba for filing a case he said was calculated “to dishonestly advance a political narrative,” and for misusing the courts.

In 2025, the 11th Circuit affirmed Middlebrooks, including the sanctions, saying that many of Trump’s and Habba’s legal arguments “were indeed frivolous.”

In the new filing, the attorneys said the time limit for launching the suit should have been extended because Trump opted to delay filing during his first term of office so he could focus on executing his constitutional responsibilities as the nation’s chief executive.

The attorneys argue that the heavy demands of being president justify pausing the normal deadline for filing a private lawsuit while Trump is in office, so he should not have to choose between running the country and defending his own legal rights.

The attorneys also ask the Supreme Court to decide whether a lower court can fine a president and his lawyers close to $1 million merely for making that argument, even if the court rejects it in the end.

“This court’s intervention is necessary to protect the presidency, and to prevent judicial disagreement from becoming a license to punish its advocates,” the petition said.

It is unclear when the Supreme Court will take up the petition.