Trump ERUPTS As Court CLEARS PATH For Criminal Trial — DC Frozen In Panic!
VIRAL '3-0 TRUMP IMMUNITY DEFEAT' IS FROM 2024 - SCOTUS VACATED IT
The unanimous D.C. Circuit opinion containing the famous 'citizen Trump' line was real - but it was issued on February 6, 2024. The Supreme Court later vacated that judgment, recognized broad immunity for official presidential acts, and the Jack Smith election case was dismissed before Trump returned to office.
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A dramatic 3-0 federal appeals ruling declaring that Donald Trump could not claim blanket criminal immunity is circulating again as if it were a fresh legal earthquake. The ruling is authentic. The timing is not. The 57-page D.C. Circuit opinion was issued more than two years ago, on February 6, 2024, in the federal election-interference prosecution brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith. More importantly, the Supreme Court later vacated that judgment and replaced its all-or-nothing approach with a far more protective immunity framework.
1. THE TRIGGER: A REAL RULING, RECYCLED AS BREAKING NEWS
The opinion in United States v. Donald J. Trump, No. 23-3228, was decided by Judges Karen LeCraft Henderson, Florence Pan and J. Michelle Childs. It was unanimous and issued per curiam.
The panel upheld Judge Tanya Chutkan's refusal to dismiss Trump's four-count federal indictment on immunity grounds. Its most quoted line said that, for purposes of that criminal case, former President Trump had become "citizen Trump," with the same defenses available to other criminal defendants.
That language was real, and at the time it was a major defeat for Trump. But it is not a new 2026 decision, and presenting it as a ruling issued "early this morning" fundamentally changes the legal reality readers are being told.
2. WHAT THE D.C. CIRCUIT ACTUALLY HELD
The D.C. Circuit rejected Trump's argument that a former president enjoyed categorical immunity from federal criminal prosecution for actions taken while in office. It also rejected his claim that criminal prosecution could proceed only after impeachment by the House and conviction by the Senate.
The panel reasoned that a former president could not transform the presidency into a permanent shield against generally applicable criminal law. It emphasized accountability and the constitutional interest in the peaceful transfer of power.
At that stage, however, the court did not divide the indictment allegation by allegation into "official" and "unofficial" presidential conduct. That omission became central when the case reached the Supreme Court.
3. THE SUPREME COURT CHANGED THE RULES
On July 1, 2024, the Supreme Court vacated the D.C. Circuit's judgment in Trump v. United States and remanded the case.
The Supreme Court rejected both extremes. It did not accept Trump's claim of absolute immunity for everything within the outer perimeter of presidential duties. But it also rejected the government's position, embraced in practical effect by the lower courts, that a former president had no criminal immunity for official acts.
Instead, the Court created three categories: absolute immunity for conduct within the president's exclusive constitutional authority; at least presumptive immunity for other official acts; and no immunity for unofficial acts. It specifically held that Trump's interactions with Justice Department officials alleged in the indictment involved core executive authority and were absolutely immune from prosecution.
That ruling means the broad "citizen Trump" formulation cannot be used today as if it were the final governing rule.
4. THE IMPEACHMENT ARGUMENT DID NOT WIN
One part of Trump's 2024 position still failed at the Supreme Court. The justices rejected the theory that the Constitution requires impeachment and Senate conviction before a former president can ever be criminally prosecuted.
The Court said the Impeachment Judgment Clause does not create that prerequisite. So the modern rule is not that presidents can never be prosecuted after leaving office.
The rule is narrower and more complicated: prosecution cannot be based on conduct protected by presidential immunity, and courts must classify the alleged acts before a criminal case can proceed. That is a major distinction from the viral claim that the Supreme Court simply endorsed unlimited presidential immunity.
5. THE JACK SMITH CASE NEVER REACHED TRIAL
After the Supreme Court remand, Smith obtained a superseding indictment designed to focus the case on conduct prosecutors believed remained prosecutable under the new immunity framework.
But the case did not proceed to a jury. Trump won the 2024 election. On November 25, 2024, Smith moved to dismiss the prosecution based on the Justice Department's longstanding position that a sitting president cannot be federally prosecuted. Chutkan granted the request and dismissed the case without prejudice.
Smith's final report, released in January 2025, confirmed that the election case was dropped because Trump was returning to the presidency - not because prosecutors had abandoned their view of the evidence or because the D.C. Circuit had issued a new ruling clearing the way to trial.
6. WHY THIS MATTERS NOW
Old court decisions routinely return to social media stripped of dates, later appeals and procedural history. This one is especially misleading because the legal landscape changed dramatically after the 2024 D.C. Circuit decision.
A reader seeing only the 3-0 opinion could reasonably believe Trump has just lost an immunity fight and that a Jack Smith trial is about to restart. Neither is true. There is no new 2026 D.C. Circuit immunity ruling in this criminal case, the Supreme Court vacated the 2024 judgment, and the federal election prosecution itself was dismissed in 2024.
The strongest current headline is therefore not that Trump just suffered a constitutional defeat. It is that a genuine but superseded ruling is being recycled without the Supreme Court decision and case dismissal that came after it.
REALITY CHECK
WHAT IS ESTABLISHED
• The D.C. Circuit issued a unanimous 3-0 immunity opinion on February 6, 2024.
• The opinion used the 'citizen Trump' formulation and rejected blanket criminal immunity.
• The Supreme Court vacated that judgment on July 1, 2024 and recognized immunity for official presidential acts.
• Judge Tanya Chutkan dismissed the Jack Smith election case on November 25, 2024 after prosecutors requested dismissal.
WHAT IS NOT ESTABLISHED
• There is no new September 2026 3-0 D.C. Circuit ruling rejecting Trump's immunity claim in the Jack Smith election case.
• The 2024 D.C. Circuit opinion is not the final controlling statement of presidential criminal immunity.
• The Supreme Court did not hold that presidents have immunity for unofficial acts.
• The federal election case is not currently moving toward a Jack Smith criminal trial.
HOUTHIS SEIZE RED SEA ISLAND — TRUMP NOW FACES A SECOND GLOBAL CHOKEPOINT
Perim Island sits inside the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, a route linked to about 12% of global trade and roughly 7% of petroleum flows. The Houthis now hold the island after a lightning coastal offensive — while Trump has so far refused Saudi requests for direct U.S. strikes.
WASHINGTON, D.C. & BAB EL-MANDEB — The Houthis have taken the small volcanic island that sits in the middle of one of the world’s most important shipping lanes — and the timing could hardly be worse for Donald Trump. After seizing the Yemeni port of Mokha and pushing south along the Red Sea coast, the Iran-aligned movement captured Perim Island, also known as Mayun, inside the Bab el-Mandeb Strait. The island itself is tiny. Its location is not. It divides the narrow waterway into two shipping channels and gives the Houthis a strategic foothold beside a route that connects Asia and the Gulf to the Suez Canal and Europe.
1. THE SEIZURE: PERIM ISLAND HAS FALLEN
Reuters, AP and regional outlets have confirmed that Houthi fighters reached Perim on Friday after forces aligned with Yemen’s internationally recognized government withdrew. The group also captured Mokha and the nearby coastal town of Dhubab, giving it a much stronger position along Yemen’s western coastline.
The advance was not merely symbolic. Perim lies in the Bab el-Mandeb — the “Gate of Tears” — between Yemen and the Horn of Africa. Ships transiting between the Indian Ocean and the Red Sea pass through this narrow corridor before heading north toward the Suez Canal.
Yemeni government forces have vowed to regroup and fight back, and Saudi-backed air attacks are continuing. So Houthi control should not be treated as permanently settled. But as of Sunday, the island remains in Houthi hands.
2. WHY THE NUMBER 12% MATTERS
About 12% of global trade passes through the Bab el-Mandeb and the Red Sea-Suez route under normal conditions. Reuters also estimates that roughly 7% of global petroleum supplies move through the strait.
That does not mean the Houthis now “control 12% of world trade” in a literal economic sense. They do not own the ships, the cargo or the canal. The danger is leverage: from positions on the Yemeni coast and islands inside the strait, the group can threaten, harass or potentially interrupt traffic.
The world has already seen what that can do. Earlier Houthi attacks beginning in 2023 forced major shipping companies to divert vessels around the Cape of Good Hope, adding time, fuel costs and insurance expenses. A renewed campaign from a stronger geographic position could recreate that pressure on a larger scale.
3. TRUMP’S PROBLEM: HORMUZ IS ALREADY UNDER PRESSURE
The seizure is more dangerous because the other major Gulf chokepoint — the Strait of Hormuz — is already disrupted by the widening U.S.-Iran war. Before the current conflict, about one-fifth of global oil supplies moved through Hormuz.
Saudi Arabia had responded by shifting more crude westward toward Red Sea terminals and relying heavily on its East-West pipeline. But that pipeline was itself temporarily shut after drone attacks launched from Iraqi territory, according to Saudi and Iraqi officials. It had recently been carrying about 4 million to 5 million barrels per day.
That creates the nightmare scenario strategists have feared: pressure on Hormuz on one side of the Arabian Peninsula and a Houthi foothold at Bab el-Mandeb on the other.
4. MBS ASKED TRUMP FOR HELP — TRUMP SAID NO TO DIRECT STRIKES
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman asked Trump for U.S. military help against the Houthis as their offensive accelerated, according to Reuters. Washington declined direct intervention for now but agreed to provide intelligence and targeting support.
Trump later confirmed he had spoken with the crown prince. He also said the Houthis had contacted his administration and asked the United States not to enter the fight directly.
That leaves Trump in a difficult position. If the United States re-enters a direct air war with the Houthis, it risks opening another demanding front while American forces are already engaged in the broader conflict with Iran. If Washington stays out, Saudi Arabia and Yemen’s government must try to reverse the Houthi gains without U.S. combat power.
5. THE HOUTHIS SAY SHIPPING IS SAFE — MARKETS ARE NOT CONVINCED
Houthi officials have publicly said international commercial shipping has nothing to fear and that normal navigation can continue. But those assurances are being treated cautiously because the group has a recent history of targeting merchant vessels and declaring selective maritime blockades.
Markets are reacting to the broader risk, not only to what the Houthis say they intend to do today. Oil has climbed back above $100 a barrel as fighting has intensified, Saudi infrastructure has come under attack and the security of both Hormuz and Bab el-Mandeb has deteriorated.
The question is therefore not whether every ship will be stopped. It is whether insurers, shipping companies and energy traders believe the route is safe enough to use without a war-risk premium.
6. WHAT HAPPENS NEXT
Yemen’s government says its forces are regrouping and intends to retake lost territory. Saudi Arabia is carrying out air attacks against Houthi positions, while the Houthis have answered with fresh missile and drone attacks on Saudi territory.
For Trump, the strategic choice is getting harder. A year ago, he struck a deal under which U.S. bombing of the Houthis stopped in exchange for reduced attacks on Red Sea shipping. A renewed American campaign would effectively bury that arrangement and could expose U.S. ships and regional bases to retaliation.
The island itself may be small enough to disappear on most maps. But its capture has put one of the world’s most important trade corridors back at the center of the war. If Bab el-Mandeb becomes another contested chokepoint, the consequences will travel far beyond Yemen — into oil prices, shipping costs and U.S. politics.
REALITY CHECK
WHAT IS ESTABLISHED
• Houthi forces seized Perim/Mayun Island after Yemeni government-aligned forces withdrew.
• Perim lies inside the Bab el-Mandeb Strait and divides the waterway into two shipping channels.
• Reuters estimates the route is tied to about 12% of global trade and roughly 7% of global petroleum flows.
• Trump has so far declined direct U.S. strikes and agreed to intelligence support for Saudi Arabia.
WHAT IS NOT ESTABLISHED
• The Houthis have not literally seized 12% of world trade; the 12% figure describes traffic normally using the route.
• It is not established that the Houthis will close Bab el-Mandeb to all commercial shipping.
May you like
• Houthi control of Perim is not necessarily permanent; Saudi-backed forces say they will counterattack.
• There is no confirmed U.S. decision to launch a new direct war against the Houthis.
