The Supreme Court was very quick to decide Trump’s eligibility to remain on the CO ballot. It should be equally fast in resolving Trump’s immunity case. The country can’t wait until June for its ruling — Brennan Center #quotes#quote#SCOTUS#Trump#Immunity#Republicans#Law
They could set the matter in stone, and should, that immunity is not an option for a POTUS. Of course asking the Supreme Court politicians to do the right thing is what it is.
"Supreme Court Move 'Not a Good Thing' for Donald Trump: George Conway"
"In delaying the trial, he argued, the move increased the likelihood that the case might go to trial closer to the general election in November, which could hurt him in the eyes of voters."
There are many moving pieces. Will this help or hurt Trump? Who knows. Court prognostication is a side show. One thing we do know is Trump sent an armed insurrection to the Capital chanting, "Hang Mike Pence." Whatever the courts say, we know what he did and what he intends to do, and we, the people, will judge him in November.
The Counter argument
WHY #SCOTUS needed to hear it…
"Had the Supreme Court declned to hear the case, that would not have made Trump’s immunity claim go away or clear the way for him to be held accountable. It would have just settled the issue only for one case, the January 6th prosecution in the DC Federal District Court.
"But it would not have been settled anywhere else outside of the DC Circuit, including in Florida where Trump has also raised the same immunity claim in his documents case."
SCOTUS accelerated President Nixon's resignation with its decision in US. v. Nixon - which it took on direct appeal from the district court.
SCOTUS is delaying President Trump's trial after rejecting Jack Smith's certiorari petition directly from the district court, requiring an appellate decision, sitting on the stay for 2 weeks and then deciding to hear the case in 2 months.
You can count on Charles Pierce, with his sharp Irish-American tongue, for a zingy summation of a story. Here's his take on the ruling federal court handed down yesterday in DC on Trump's ludicrous immunity claim:
"Three women on the bench looked at the exalted claims of a guy who already has been judged a sexual predator and laughed in his face."
"As you’ve probably heard by now, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, in a unanimous ruling, rejected the claim by Donald J. Trump that he is immune from prosecution for acts he took while he was president, upholding Judge Tanya Chutkan’s previous ruling to that effect."
~ Lucian K. Truscott
Hell, yes, the law applies to Donald J. Trump if it means anything at all.
"The Court of Appeals rejected every one of Trump’s legal claims – that he was simply carrying out his role as president under the 'Take Care Clause' of the Constitution, that his actions were 'official acts' that cannot be prosecuted because the president is protected from lawsuits and prosecution while in office, and that the charges against him amounted to 'double jeopardy' because he had been impeached and found not guilty by the Senate."
Greg Garrett asks, What if Trump's openly telegraphed intention to be unconstrained by rule of law if he's president isn't just about his legal defense but is a key feature of his political appeal? He's priming his supporters to expect and demand that he — and they — be above the law if he's directed.
And they are clearly fervently on board with that idea, judging by PRRI findings cited by Garrett.
"Trump is relentlessly conditioning his supporters to expect a second term in which he will bend or break the law to wield the machinery of the state to persecute his opponents, perhaps on a mass scale—as he recently put it, to 'root out' the 'vermin.' Trump is telling his supporters that he will carry out their retribution, that he will persecute their enemies, that this is their due."
Joyce Vance sums up Trump's argument for immunity:
"A former president can try to steal an election. He can do anything; kill off his political rivals. That's the world Trump is advocating for—I'm a criminal and you're stuck with me. It is the most forthright statement of authoritarianism imaginable."
"Let’s make it simple: Presidents, police officers, and pedophile priests are not immune from criminal prosecution. No court has ever ruled that they are. Nor does the Constitution grant such immunity. …
What Trump wants is immunity from being scrutinized at all. Like an emperor who decrees that none shall be allowed to gaze directly upon him, Trump wants all his actions to be immune from accountability."
"What is the law coming to when a former president can seriously argue for his plenary right to kill his opponents and yet still be considered a leading contender for election? The mind boggles and the rule of law shudders on its weakened foundations."