Post New

On December 22, 2023, the United States Supreme Court announced it would not take the direct appeal requesting an immediate ruling on Presidential immunity involving Donald Trump, tossing it back to the appellate court. The court's decision to do nothing at this point in time has profound impacts on the case and the United States.

The issue involved is immunity so unlike other legal issues which might come up in a court, a defendant claiming immunity is essentially arguing NOTHING in the case should progress because it would impose a burden on the defendant who might not even be subject to prosecution. In the case of Trump, this allows the ping pong between the trial court and appellate court on this immunity issue to continue and FREEZES any other steps in the process the court might pursue that require work on the part of Trump's team.

The net result is until the appellate court makes a ruling, virtually NOTHING happens on ANY case the federal government might pursue. That includes a new case in Michigan in which Trump himself personally spoke with Republican canvassers trying to get them to withhold certification of votes in Wayne County (metro Detroit). And of course, regardless of what the appellate court does, their ruling will be either appealed by Jack Smith (if they rule a President HAS immunity) or by Donald Trump (if they rule a President does NOT have immunity) and it will go right back to...

...the United States Supreme Court, otherwise known as the DC office of the Federalist Society.

This decision not to decide now could be interpreted in multiple ways.

ONE -- The USSC simply wants to avoid the appearance of meddling by requiring the case to go through the normal appellate process like any other case. Those coming to this conclusion might be assuming the USSC is doing what it can to tamp down the inevitable conspiracy theories and violence that might erupt in alt-right circles if the court is seen aggressively becoming involved.

TWO -- The USSC actively wants the entire issue to stay out of its hands if at all possible and one logically possible way to do that is to defer an immediate ruling, allow the appellate court to rule one way or the other, then hope the party on the losing end declines to appeal. This makes ZERO sense. Even if one assumes lower courts might rule in a way that implies Presidential immunity because they cannot find language in prior law to support making such a cut and dry ruling DENYING Presidential immunity, such a ruling will absolutely be appealed until leadership of the Justice Department changes hands. Trump himself will NEVER give up because this is the only thing keeping him out of jail and he has plenty of other people's money to pay lawyers for eternity.

THREE -- The USSC actively wants the entire issue to stay out of its hands if at all possible and a SECOND way to do that is to allow normal procedural delays to push any ultimate trial far beyond the point where it can affect the November 2024 election, allowing Trump to win, take office in January 2025 and kill the case himself. Problem solved. Case goes away.

FOUR -- The USSC actively wants their patron saint Trump to actually re-assume office as President but want to keep their fingerprints off any actions that would facilitate that happening. By failing to decide an issue NOW that will CLEARLY at some point reach their docket anyway, the USSC is telegraphing they have no concern with Trump regaining the Presidency and -- more disturbingly -- they believe Presidents HAVE immunity for their acts in office.

The failure by the USSC to actively engage in this case and clarify this pending question is the ultimate proof of not only how corrupt and insular the USSC is as an institution and as individuals but also the ultimate proof how corrupt America's judicial system has become. The system is already biased towards those that can afford more in legal fees. In this case, attempts to appear unbiased are leading some judges to literally treat issues related to Trump cases before them like any other case, with weeks between court appearances between motions and filings, etc., like a property dispute over a privacy fence is being adjudicated.

The most appalling aspect of the USSC's decision to dodge this issue is that they may not only have a majority that wants Trump to re-take office, but that majority may think they are protecting the court's standing not only with the future President but the public as well. The reality is that a future President Trump will have no more respect for the USSC than he will for the millions of Americans that will be subjected to the forces of revenge and autocracy unleashed by the D-list and F-list players that will take over in a Trump II Administration. The USSC will likely NEVER regain prior levels of support from the public in light of its last decade of originalist retreat into a legal fantasyland devoid of civil rights and privacy rights.

This case of Presidential immunity could very well be the ball game for the United States.

A republic, if you can keep it... Indeed.


WTH

Life time appointments is an invitation to corruption.

The Appeal Court hearing is January 9, 2024. SCOTUS may have wanted more discussion on this issue before making the final ruling. Instead of just doing the easy task of deciding this particular case, SCOTUS often attempts to develop legal tests that can be applied to strange hypotheticals. Considering all possibilities takes time.

The easy way would be to consider that only one former U.S. President has ever been criminally indicted. Trump is an outlier. SCOTUS could limit its ruling to ONLY TRUMP, only consider the facts in this case, and say future Presidents will get their own chance in court if needed. But that would be too easy.

=== links ===
USCA Case #23-3228 Document #2031216 Filed: 12/12/2023
Trump's argument is immunity is needed to prevent "former President may be prosecuted for ... using lethal force abroad."
"Under Former President Trump’s View Of Absolute Immunity, A Future President Could Disregard Current Criminal Restraints Against Using The Military To Alter Election Results."
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscour...

"In a 5–4 decision, the Court ruled that the President is entitled to absolute immunity from legal liability for civil damages based on his official acts. The Court, however, emphasized that the President is not immune from criminal charges stemming from his official or unofficial acts while he is in office."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nixon_v._Fitzgerald

"Courts traditionally have recognized the President's constitutional responsibilities and status as factors counseling judicial deference and restraint... When judicial action is needed to serve broad public interests--as when the Court acts, not in derogation of the separation of powers, but to maintain their proper balance, or to vindicate the public interest in an ongoing criminal prosecution--the exercise of jurisdiction has been held warranted. In the case of this merely private suit for damages based on a President's official acts, we hold it is not."
https://edge.sagepub.com/conlaw/resources/a-short-...

Past presidents, while never indicted, have faced legal woes of their own
Nixon was an "unindicted co-conspirator"
"Clinton was accused of giving false testimony to a grand jury, which amounts to perjury, and obstruction of justice."
A number of presidents have been accused of being war criminals, but these "did not produce any movement toward prosecution in the U.S.".
https://www.npr.org/2023/04/03/1167662256/past-pre...

In this video, Conway says the stay might be lifted after the Appeals Court ruling. Skip ahead to around 2:00 in the video:
"I think today's order is not a big deal ... I don't think its going to affect the trial date much... it might push it into the summer."
https://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/-sleaziest-thin...

Interesting. The argument from George Conway and Lisa Rubin here is that the USSC's decline of the request to skip the appellate layer is a sign of TROUBLE for Trump and a sign the USSC actually knows the appellate court will rule (relatively) quickly and will likely thump Trump's argument for immunity. At that point, Trump would likely appeal it back to the USSC at which point they could simply decline to hear the appeal, further cementing judicial consensus by having an identical ruling at the trial and appellate levels -- and at the USSC via their refusal to hear the final appeal. NOT hearing that final appeal after two LOWER courts reach the same conclusion could be construed as MORE support for the argument being ludicrous by implying it isn't worth the USSC's time to bother hearing that final appeal. If they DID hear it, some might construe that to mean the argument is closer to a coin toss.

I hope they're right.


WTH

Post New

Berkshire Hathaway FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.