SCOTUS is more useless than I feared.
Steering clear of a political firestorm for now, the Supreme Court said Friday it would not immediately decide the key question of whether Donald Trump has broad immunity for actions he took as president challenging his 2020 election loss.
The court denied without comment special counsel Jack Smith’s request asking the justices to circumvent the normal appeals court process and quickly decide the question, which looms large in Trump’s prosecution in Washington over allegations of election interference.
I’m sure there will be more commentary on this soon.
I think I heard the appellate court agreed to hear this case in early January so this adds another layer of delay obviously. But maybe only 6-8 weeks or so? Had the Supremes agreed to bypass the appellate and take the case any decision they render (Stump is fucked) would be in question. Lets follow the letter of the law. I'm not a lawyer just a retired technical type but I'm pretty sure the appellate court is going to tell Stump he's screwed, no immunity for you. It's going to end up in Roberts, Coney and Kavanagh's lap, any decision rendered before they hear it makes it easier for them! One way or tother. So this is a win for Stump today but maybe not down the road. How the hell did we get here?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CK9xIXkab08&list=PLAk4lEF_fvlDz077lW5gUoQedggBCG0oJ&index=1
Read Steve Vladek's analysis. This is mostly a procedural decision and not nearly as 'sky is falling' as it's being made out to be.
I couldn't find anything from Steve Vladeck on the USSC decision to reject Smith's request that they immediately take up the absolute immunity question. Do you have a link?
I'm concerned because I think that while it might make sense to many people that the appellate court will be okay, I don't think it works on a scheduling basis. So the appellate court is going to fast track the immunity question, so maybe then the SCOTUS can deal with it without 35% of the country feeling like it was rigged. But I think Joyce Vance pointed out that TFG then has 90 days to file an appeal to the SC. He will drag his feet and do it at the last minute. Then it could be another 45 days before they get through the pleadings and briefs and such. So: Appellate decision Feb '24. Then 4.5 months before SCOTUS upholds it after much internal unpublicized hand-wringing. Then in July, the DC Jan 6 process can then re-start. They're on hold in the PROCESS until then… all the stuff that would have to be happening between now and March if SCOTUS gave them a final ruling tomorrow. July/Aug '24 to start that process? No way the voters will get to know the real deal before the election.
A lot depends on the wording of the appellate decision. A few reputable lawyer types have said that the three judges on the appeals court will sustain Judge Chutkan. That means the case is released back to her to do "stuff" like start to assemble a jury, schedule pre-trial meetings and do the housekeeping associated with the trial. Theoretically a delay of six to eight weeks – a trial in May. Trump will seek to stay everything (possibly before he files an appeal) which I suspect will be denied. Trump has swung at the same pitch two times and whiffed – there's nothing new to add to his argument before the Supremes that requires extra time to prepare.
So mid-to-late January, the appeals court says the argument of presidential immunity is a crock of you-know-what. Denied! Hopefully with a comment that justice delayed is justice denied. The case should proceed to trial where Donald Trump can present his defense according to the rules of evidence before a jury, the system designed by the Founders and the appropriate venue for an issue that should be resolved before the election so the voters have a factual basis to cast their votes.\
Dammit! Trump has boasted and exaggerated his so-called lead in the presidential race as the reason the charges were brought. If the case is a fraud, you should be able to tear apart the witnesses and expose the evidence as a fabrication. If the case is a fraud, Jack Smith should be afraid of the protections that due process affords the defendant. If the case would fall apart, the greatest damage to Trump was done by bringing charges and the prosecutor should be eager for delays.
I'm not sure the USSC will take up the case. Why? Because the argument is preposterous. If they hear the case they will concur with the lower courts but their names will be on the decision. How did Trump react when Pence refused on J6? Trump is fighting the gag orders as they come down because Trump can't sic the mob on the judge and witnesses. If/when the Supremes rule against Trump, he'll be enraged. So who was the judge in the New Testament who washed his hands of the case he didn't want? The USSC can rule by declining to hear a case and they have repeatedly with Trump. Gag order? Not a chance the USSC will hear it. The civil case of business fraud in NY? It will go to appeal -what makes the fraud case so special the Supremes will schedule it? The only novel feature is Trump's name. Otherwise, it's just another greedy business cheat who got caught. But the Supremes don't want to incur the wrath (potentially violent) of MAGA and why should they if the lower courts make proper decisions, properly articulated? It won't keep Trump from whining but Trump will always have another case in the wings he does not want to prejudice with the Supremes.
So I'm watching for the exact text of the appeal court in striking Trump down. I'm watching to see if the court turns the trial back on and denies any request to stay the trial until Trump has run out of paper to write up ridiculous appeals. And I'm watching to see if the USSC requires that any appeal from Trump needs to have some legal feature worthy of their consideration. (And yes, I'd love to see the Supremes tell Trump that he's not special.)
I think the SCOTUS ducked it deliberately…to avoid severe blowback. If they ruled in Trump's favor, they would be giving all future presidents a lifetime "Get Out of Jail Free" card, which is not only preposterous, in a constitutional and legal sense, but also very dangerous.
On the other hand, if they ruled against Trump, then the fury and potential violence from Trump's cult members would be focused on them.
By sending the case to the appellate court, the justices have to know that Trump will lose – and then they can refuse to take the appeal, keeping their hands clean.
If the appellate court fast tracks the case, it will add to the delays but might still allow a trial before the election. We'll see.
Hope you're right about the timing thing.
Cowards
The ridiculousness
3 years after a public crime and courts cant grow up but instead let drumpf drag it out as he has done all his life.
No lawyer here, but just from a common sense approach:
If Trump were actually innocent he should want the court to weigh in now. That way he could go into the election without that cloud hanging over him, and the voters would have that vital piece of information to inform their decision. That he doesn't want that, and that apparently the SC doesn't want it, at least not now, says both parties are aware that Trump is guilty. So kick the can down the road until "we" can figure out how to unburden Trump and keep everybody on the right, from the megalomaniac donors down to the nutcase Trump supporters.
But its so obvious its barely worth mentioning: Trump wants to kick the can so far down the road that he gets to run free of any legal, criminal judgement, and in the hopes that he wins and makes the entire thing go away. (or there is a President Haley who pardons him — I could see that happening if she won somehow.) Regarding the CO case of Trump being kicked off the ballot, some are saying "let the people decide." But at the same time don't want to let the people know whether he's guilty of the most serious charges against him until after the election. So much for "the people."
The idea that we have to spend the next year, bum fumbling through all these trials, Trump drama, phony media narratives and shock polls!, not to mention all the free publicity he'll get; having to endure the absurd situation of the press pretending that a presidential candidate running with 91 felony indictments is "normal" — nothing to see here folks — is maddening. Meanwhile, also pretending, that the worst thing ever is that our choice will be Biden vs. Trump, as a way of putting Biden on the same plane of being a disastrous choice as the twice impeached, clearly corrupt Trump and his family, ignoring the fact that Ivanka and Jared actually did, in spades, what they are accusing Hunter Biden of, while the latter is demonized in ways no presidential family member has ever been.
Worst case: Trump gets "elected" and Americans look back in unimaginable regret having thrown away everything over the economy as they continue to spend themselves into oblivion, metaphorically for thirty pieces of silver. In which case "we" will have gotten what we deserve.