A coalition of 14 states, led by America First Legal (AFL) and the State of Iowa, has filed an amicus brief in the Delaware Court of Chancery, urging the court to either delay or dismiss a lawsuit against President Donald Trump.
The case, United Atlantic Ventures, LLC v. Trump Media and Technology Group Corp., involves a commercial dispute over ownership rights and board seats related to Trump’s social media platform, Truth Social. The coalition argues that the lawsuit should be postponed until after Trump’s presidential term to avoid distracting him from his duties as Commander-in-Chief.
READ: DOJ Wants Sen. Chuck Schumer To “Clarify” Threatening Comments Aimed At Supreme Court Justices
The legal dispute stems from a December 2024 lawsuit filed by United Atlantic Ventures, a minority stakeholder in Trump Media & Technology Group (TMTG). The plaintiff alleges that Trump improperly transferred shares of TMTG, which owns Truth Social, and disputes control over board seats. The lawsuit, initiated in February 2024 before Trump’s reelection, has now become a matter of contention as it involves a sitting U.S. President.
Truth Social, launched in February 2022, was created as a platform for conservative voices following Trump’s permanent suspension from Twitter in January 2021. The platform has since become a cornerstone of Trump’s media empire and a hub for his political base.
In its amicus brief, America First Legal contends that the court should dismiss the lawsuit based on constitutional separation of powers principles. AFL argues that the President’s responsibilities as the nation’s leader should take precedence over civil litigation, particularly in matters unrelated to his official duties.
READ: White House Defends Trump’s Tariffs As Necessary To Protect American Economy, Combat Fentanyl Crisis
“The principle of the President’s independent authority to control his own time and energy is paramount,” the brief states. “As Commander-in-Chief, President Trump must focus entirely on domestic policy and national security without the undue burden of defending against a commercial lawsuit.”
The coalition urges the Delaware Court of Chancery to exercise judicial restraint by postponing proceedings until Trump’s term concludes. AFL emphasizes that state courts lack the authority to adjudicate civil matters against a sitting President, as such actions could undermine the executive branch’s ability to govern effectively.
The amicus brief is supported by attorneys general from 14 states, including Iowa, Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Texas. These states argue that the lawsuit represents an unnecessary distraction for a sitting President and could set a dangerous precedent for future leaders.
READ: New EPA Chief Has Message For Bureaucrats Hoping To Stymie Trump Agenda From Within
Dan Epstein, Vice President of America First Legal, underscored the importance of protecting the President’s ability to serve without interference. “State courts do not have the authority to adjudicate civil matters against a sitting President,” Epstein said. “As the nation’s most democratically accountable public servant, the President cannot be unwillingly distracted by the burden of defending against a lawsuit. The sovereignty of states in their own sphere is paramount. But the authority of the President is one the states cannot disturb.”
President Trump has faced an unprecedented number of lawsuits during his political career, more than any other president in American history. These legal battles have spanned a wide range of issues, from business disputes to allegations of misconduct. The current lawsuit adds to this extensive list, raising questions about the balance between presidential responsibilities and personal legal matters.
READ: Bipartisan Lawmakers Unite To Counter Nuclear Threat From Iran
The coalition’s filing highlights the unique challenges faced by a sitting President entangled in civil litigation. By urging the court to delay or dismiss the case, the states aim to ensure that Trump can focus on his presidential duties without the added strain of defending against a corporate governance dispute.
The outcome of this case could have significant implications for future presidents and the scope of judicial authority over sitting leaders. If the court agrees to postpone the proceedings, it would reinforce the principle that the President’s time and energy should be devoted to governing, not litigation.
Conversely, allowing the case to proceed could open the door to increased legal challenges against sitting presidents, potentially disrupting their ability to lead effectively.
Please make a small donation to the Tampa Free Press to help sustain independent journalism. Your contribution enables us to continue delivering high-quality, local, and national news coverage.
Connect with us: Follow the Tampa Free Press on Facebook and Twitter for breaking news and updates.
Sign up: Subscribe to our free newsletter for a curated selection of top stories delivered straight to your inbox.