Trump is not immune from prosecution in his 2020 election interference case, US appeals court says
apnews.com
The ruling is significant not only for its stark repudiation of Trump’s novel immunity claims but also because it breathes life back into a landmark prosecution that had been effectively frozen for weeks as the court considered the appeal.
Yet the one-month gap between when the court heard arguments and issued its ruling has already created uncertainty about the timing of a trial in a calendar-jammed election year, with the judge overseeing the case last week canceling the initial March 4 date.
Trump’s team vowed to appeal, which could postpones the case by weeks or months — particularly if the Supreme Court agrees to take it up. The judges gave Trump a week to ask the Supreme Court to get involved.
You are viewing a single comment
Don't kid yourself, the supreme court may well take it up. The most corrupt supreme court in more than a century, perhaps of all time, is more than happy to tear down the rule of law.
The thing is that if they rule in trump's favor they essentially take away their own power and give it back to the president, because with that ruling president is essentially a king. He can make sure that something unfortunate would happen to anyone non loyal in Congress, SCOTUS etc and have no consequences.
Biden also is still the president right now so it would also apply to him, although I don't think he would go to these lengths.
After the abortion case, the Supreme Court has been cowardly refusing to hear cases where they know the conservative base wants it but nobody else does. They wash their hands and let the lower court's ruling stand.
Thomas will probably vote in favor to hear the case, because he's an sycophantic idiot, but there probably won't be enough others for them to accept the case.
They decided 5-4 on the settled law that the Federal government has authority over the border. The 5 were on the correct side, but it should have bee 9-0. I wouldn't put money on them being chastened by public backlash.
I suspect it's not uncommon to have token dissent so they can pander to their donors and their base but still give the ruling that is the most politically expedient. Much like how a party will let a few members vote against a bill but the bill itself easily has the numbers to pass.
Of course, it's disgusting that supreme court justices have a political alignment at all, but it is what it is.
Letting the lower court's ruling stand says, "We agree. The appeal is meritless." And the fight is officially OVER. That not good enough for you? Should they have heard these cases?
https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-transgender-bathrooms-indiana-35c59c4dbe94668592c96e2a27c8d517
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/u-s-supreme-court-wont-take-up-wa-capital-gains-tax-challenge/
Not sure who you're yelling at. We seem to agree.
I meant that bit. I don't find that cowardly, seems perfectly normal jurisprudence. No?
Except they have had the opportunity to do so, were warned against doing so by many legal professionals, and chose not to.
Yeah they're corrupt assholes but their decisions aren't consistent with wanton destruction of the rule of law. So far.
This talks in part about their decision on Independent State Legislature Doctrine which is what I'm basing the above on:
https://www.vox.com/scotus/2024/2/6/24054902/supreme-court-trump-anderson-disqualification-insurrection-fourteenth-amendment
Perhaps but in this case the relevant fact is that they're corrupt assholes who have lifetime appointments that the GOP will defend at all costs and so they don't need Trump for anything and aren't beholden to him in any way.