WASHINGTON (AP) — King Charles III will deliver an address to Congress during his visit to Washington in late April, becoming the first British monarch to give a speech to a joint meeting of U.S. lawmakers in more than three decades.

The joint address was announced on Wednesday by congressional leaders, who said it was part of the 250th anniversary of the U.S. declaring independence from Britain. The speech also comes at a time of friction between the two nations, which have since become close allies.

President Donald Trump’s “America First” foreign policy has called into question the U.S. commitment to European allies, and Britain has declined to support the U.S. involvement in the war in Iran.

Still, congressional leaders emphasized the close relationship between the U.S. and Britain.

“The American experiment endures in no small part because of the British tradition from which it sprang,” said House Speaker Mike Johnson, House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries, Senate Majority Leader John Thune and Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer in a letter addressed to Charles. “We believe an Address to Congress will provide a unique opportunity to share your vision for the future of our special relationship and reaffirm our alliance at this pivotal time in history.”

In Britain, some members of Parliament have called on Prime Minister Keir Starmer to cancel the state visit by Charles in retaliation for Trump lashing out at them for declining to support the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran. Starmer decided to proceed with the state visit, which could potentially ease the tensions caused by the war.

The pomp and circumstance of state visits by the British monarch have been used for years to bolster relations with countries around the world. Queen Elizabeth II was the last British monarch to deliver a joint address to Congress, in 1991.

But some lawmakers also want to use the occasion to press forward their investigation into sexual abuse by New York financier Jeffrey Epstein. Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna wrote to Charles to request a meeting between him and survivors of abuse from Epstein and his former girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell.

“I respectfully ask that you privately meet with survivors of Jeffrey Epstein’s and Ghislaine Maxwell’s abuse, so they may speak to you directly about the ways powerful individuals and institutions failed them. Survivors want this meeting,” Khanna said in the letter.

In Britain, there has been intense scrutiny of Epstein’s ties to powerful figures in the British government. Last year, Charles stripped the former Prince Andrew, his brother, of his royal titles and evicted him from his royal residence after weeks of pressure to act over his relationship with Epstein.

Some U.S. lawmakers have bemoaned the fact that the reckoning over Epstein has extended further in Britain and other parts of Europe than it has in the U.S.

Epstein died in a New York jail cell in 2019 while awaiting trial. Maxwell was convicted of sex trafficking but has sought to be freed from her 20-year prison sentence, saying new evidence proves constitutional violations spoiled her trial.

The former Prince Andrew, now known simply as Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, has repeatedly denied committing any crimes.

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump is not immune from civil claims that he incited a mob of his supporters to attack the Capitol on Jan, 6, 2021, a federal judge has ruled in one of the last unresolved legal cases stemming from the riot.

U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta ruled Tuesday that Trump’s remarks at his “Stop the Steal” rally, held on the Ellipse near the White House shortly before the siege began, “plausibly” were inciting words that are not protected by the First Amendment right to free speech.

The Republican president is not shielded from liability for much of his Jan. 6 conduct, including that speech and many of his social media posts that day, according to the judge. But Mehta said Trump cannot be held liable for his official acts that day, including his Rose Garden remarks during the riot and his interactions with Justice Department officials.

“President Trump has not shown that the Speech reasonably can be understood as falling within the outer perimeter of his Presidential duties,” Mehta wrote. “The content of the Ellipse Speech confirms that it is not covered by official-acts immunity.”

Not the first court ruling on presidential immunity

The decision is not the court’s first ruling that Trump can be held liable for the violence at the Capitol and it is unlikely to be the last given the near-certainty of an appeal. But the 79-page ruling sets the stage for a possible civil trial in the same courthouse where Trump was charged with crimes for his Jan. 6 conduct, before his 2024 election ended the prosecution.

Mehta previously refused to dismiss the claims against Trump in a February 2022 ruling that Trump was not entitled to presidential immunity from the claims brought by Democratic members of Congress and law enforcement officers who guarded the Capitol on Jan. 6. In that decision, Mehta also concluded that Trump’s words during his rally speech plausibly amounted to incitement and were not protected by the First Amendment.

The case returned to Mehta after an appeals court ruling upheld his 2022 decision. He said Tuesday’s ruling on immunity falls under a more “rigorous” legal standard at this later stage in the litigation.

Mehta, who was nominated by Democratic President Barack Obama, said his latest decision is not a “final pronouncement on immunity for any particular act.”

“President Trump remains free to reassert official-acts immunity as a defense at trial. But the burden will remain his and will be subject to a higher standard of proof,” the judge wrote.

Official capacity vs. office-seeker

Trump spoke to a crowd of his supporters at the rally before the mob’s attack disrupted the joint session of Congress for certifying Democrat Joe Biden’s 2020 electoral victory over Trump. Trump closed out his speech by saying, “We fight. We fight like hell and if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.”

Trump’s lawyers argued that Trump’s conduct on Jan. 6 meets the threshold for presidential immunity.

The plaintiffs contended that Trump cannot prove he was acting entirely in his official capacity rather than as an office-seeking private individual. They also said the Supreme Court has held that office-seeking conduct falls outside the scope of presidential immunity.

Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., who at that time led the House Homeland Security Committee, sued Trump, Trump’s personal attorney Rudolph Giuliani and members of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers extremist groups over the Jan. 6 riot. Other Democratic members of Congress later joined the litigation, which was consolidated with the officers’ claims.

‘Victory for the rule of law’

The civil claims survived Trump’s sweeping act of clemency on the first day of his second term, when he pardoned, commuted prison sentences and ordered the dismissal of all 1,500-plus criminal cases stemming from the Capitol siege. More than 100 police officers were injured while defending the Capitol from rioters.

The plaintiffs’ legal team includes attorneys from the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. Damon Hewitt, the group’s president and executive director, praised the ruling as a “monumental victory for the rule of law, affirming that no one, including the president of the United States, is above it.”

“The court rightly recognizes that President Trump’s actions leading to the January 6 insurrection fell outside the scope of presidential duties,” Hewitt said in a statement. “This ruling is an important step toward accountability for the violent attack on the Capitol and our democracy.”