Makes sense considering many protections don’t extend to civil matters, and he wasn’t even acting in any sort of governmental role at neither the time of the incident which compelled him to make the payment nor at the time of the payment itself.

The payment happened in October and this may be a shitty analogy but imo it’s like someone running a dozen red lights because they’re late to a police officer job interview. I mean, it may help them get the job but they’re acting as a private citizen and not in any sort of governmental capacity and it’d be absolutely bonkers for them to argue that they should retroactively have any sort of immunity on the basis that they did in fact get the job