House lawyers weigh immunity for Brooks in Jan. 6 lawsuit

WASHINGTON — The House General Counsel’s Office likely could douse the fiery legal clash between California Democrat Rep. Eric Swalwell and Alabama Republican Rep. Mo Brooks over the Jan. 6 insurrection, veterans of that office say.

Swalwell filed a lawsuit in March that accuses Brooks, former President Donald Trump and others of directly inciting the attack at the Capitol Building. It describes how Brooks promoted and spoke at the rally near the Washington Monument that preceded the attack.

Brooks has argued that the court should remove him as a defendant from the lawsuit because he was acting within the scope of his employment as a member of Congress — a legal protection House members and staff traditionally rely on to do their jobs.

Now, a federal judge has asked the House General Counsel’s Office to weigh in on that part of the unusual member vs. member litigation, which already has generated inflammatory rhetoric on even typically routine issues such as finding Brooks to serve him with the lawsuit.

The office, under control of the Democrats because they have a majority, provides legal advice and assistance for members of both parties on a day-to-day basis. So far it has stayed out of the Swalwell-Brooks fray.

The question at hand now is whether Brooks qualifies for a federal law that essentially gives immunity to government employees or officials on claims for negligent or wrongful acts — as long as they were acting within the scope of their official duties.