I could see Thomas and Alito but I don't think the others have shown any blind fealty to Trump, maybe I'm wrong. They do need to take the case up and it should be an easy 9-0 decision, of course in this political environment I know it won't be.
The DC District court decision could be upheld by the USSC if they decline to hear the appeal and then become the precedent on the POTUS immunity going forward. Thus, the USSC implicitly can set the precedent without explicitly hearing the appeal. BTW, the USSC to hear the appeal must say that the DC District court got something wrong in their decision. The notice that the Trump legal has to file with the USSC by next Monday will list out the reasons they think that the lower court got wrong. We will see if the USSC see enough reasons for them to review.
So, trump needs five justices (thomas and alito, not entirely sure all of his three appointees will join them) to avoid a trial in May.
if 4 justices vote to hear the case, the fifth would 100% approve a stay. No way the sc moves forward to hear an appeal without a stay.
The supreme court has to call out where the Appeals Court erred with its ruling. Not exactly sure where or how they can rule a unanimous ruling was in error. But again, this supreme court is pretty corrupt, so who knows. Maybe I am overly naïve and you are correct, this court will go full out to protect trump. I still think unless this supreme court wants to have its place in history as so beholden to trump that they go against the constitution and the protections it provides, I think they would at worst try to create the middle ground... of course, this court could do anything, and either way the effort to destroy our democracy and rule of law over donald trump will be a major blemish on America no matter which way they rule...
SCOTUS wouldn’t need to rule on the issue. It would just need to accept the petition for review, lay out a long briefing schedule, and sit on the issue long enough that the trial is delayed past the election. It could then subsequently affirm the DC Cir opinion. No legal error committed, but prevent the trial from going forward because it wanted to engage in “scholarly analysis”.
It's absurd to think a 3-member panel of DC judges should make the final call here. Obviously SCOTUS should take it up -- too much is at stake. The Democrats' coordinated strategy of bringing legal cases against Trump is just outrageous and disgusting. It's horrible for the country, and a dangerous precedent. None of these cases are brought -- literally none -- if Trump wasn't running for President. Making them all politically-driven -- which is a gross abuse of our justice system. Shame on these disgusting, vindicative, rage-filled people. Trashing our once-respected legal system to help them try to win an election. Short sighted and bad for the country.
I wouldn't put it past this cowardly and corrupt supreme court. They would bear the asterisk of subverting the Constitution and rule of law to defend the indefensible. History would then be the judge.
I don’t think it’s a given the USSC is as beholden to Trump as many seem to think. They’ve previously ruled against him in prior immunity claims on shielding his financial documents from prosecutors and Congress. We’ve also seen several Trump appointed judges on lower courts rule against him on several issues including claims that the 2020 election was stolen.
2- No, not when it’s obvious and when the lower court made an extremely sound judgement that is not too broad. 3- Justices have ego too. This is a once in a lifetime opportunity to put their stamp (in writing) down for history. Not that they differ so much from the lower court but to put their names next to it. I can see them taking the case for this reason.
SCOTUS is very conservative right now, but not very MAGA. I would be surprised if they're pulling out all the stops to delay or help Trump, but I've been surprised before.
6 conservative, 2 MAGAs among them *real* Conservatives do not like Trump, but they are professionals
That one isn't a Maga thing in the sense that there are very serious legal scholars, historians, and ConLaw lawyers arguing on both sides. I think it can be legitimately and genuinely argued for disqualifying him and against it. Only the super partisans deny the strong arguments of the other side. Now, you can have a strong opinion favoring one side, but this isn't a 100% easy legal slam dunk issue.
SCOTUS grants cert on a tiny percentage of cases. SCOTUS is supposed to be apolitical and a purely legal body for jurisprudence only. You trumper dipshits seem to have no understanding of our government institutions or separation of powers. Also, if you knew anything, you would know that the DC Circuit Court of Appeals is widely regarded as the most prestigious and influential federal court of appeals in the nation. The only thing SCOTUS should consider in deciding whether to grant cert is whether the DC Circuit Court of Appeals got it right and whether the DC Cir opinion requires clarification. If you knew or cared anything about jurisprudence or law, you would understand that Trumps claim of absolute presidential immunity is about the most ridiculous argument ever made. It is comically idiotic. From the perspective of legal jurisprudence, there is actually no reason for SCOTUS to waste its time taking up such a moronic issue. As opposed to the case regarding whether Trump should be on the Colorado ballot. That is an actual legal controversy with actual viable arguments in both directions. The J6 election interference and classified documents cases absolutely should be brought against Trump. The reason they were brought is because he is a traitorous felon who undertook unprecedented steps to break the law. Don’t want to do the time, don’t do the crime. your caricature level posts regarding Trump are better placed in low IQ trump echo chambers. People here graduated from high school, went to college. Lots of lawyers too. You are way out of your depth.
MAGA and most of what is considered politically conservative isn’t actually conservative and even goes against traditional Conservative. The MAGA movement is explicitly about fealty to one person. It also is about an expansion of executive power beyond the Constitutional limits and what the Founders specifically warned against. It’s why people like George Will have left the Republican Party or like Michael Luttig opposing Trump.
No one has replied to you yet bahahahahahah lol so I guess just an absolute zero chance all the felonies are worth standing? Or, they are and it is just because Trump is a POS and they are not holding someone rich and powerful accountable for once? Because if it was anyone else this wouldn’t be politically motivated right? So many contradictory statements in your post here.
