Baird filed a lawsuit in May 2024, alleging his due process rights were violated because the indictment procedure did not include a preliminary examination. He claimed that the one-person grand jury method allowed prosecutors to circumvent his ability to defend himself. Baird expanded his suit in November 2024, adding claims of unreasonable search and seizure and conspiracy to violate his Fourth, Fifth, and 14th Amendment rights.
Nessel argued in her motion that her actions fell under absolute immunity because she was acting in the scope of her prosecutorial duties when seeking an indictment. She stressed that prosecutors are immune for investigative acts undertaken in preparation for judicial proceedings, including decisions to file a criminal complaint and seek an arrest warrant.
Nessel further noted that Baird’s allegations against her were focused on her role as an advocate, not an investigator. “Baird instead rests entirely on the fact that no preliminary examination took place to support his argument that the attorney general was acting in an investigatory role. But caselaw does not support this bright-line temporal distinction,” Nessel argued.
