The Supreme Court of the United States Thread

#9,802
#9,802








Travis Media Group🇺🇸
@TM1Politics

JUST IN: Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson changed her tune, and said she now worries about future President’s being prosecuted. She asked the prosecutor if people at the Justice Department are concerned with this as well.

“Absolutely,” he responded. “That is a structural argument built into the constitution itself.” She then went on to say future President’s shouldn’t be burdened by the fear of prosecution for their actions.

It’s starting to sound like this trial is going to go Trumps way. What are the chances every Justice sides with Trump?
 
Last edited:
#9,804
#9,804
Have not read all the posts from this morning's oral arguments, so forgive me if i rehash anything. Also, disclaimer is I did not hear the whole thing, just bits and pieces and read some post argument commentary.

First, I come at this from the perspective of someone who litigates qualified immunity five days a week, and although there are a lot of difference,s there are also a lot of parallels in the discussion today. Second, I have argued the court one level below the Supreme Court probably 30 times, to the state supreme court on one occasion. Have had a half a dozen petitions to the US Supreme Court I either filed or answered, but none has ever been taken up by them. I am, however, a member of the Bar of that court.

So, the thing I think people need to understand is that the Justices have 98 percent made up their minds before they walked in this morning. There may even have been discussion about who would write what parts of the opinion(s) to be issued. I think there it will probably be 9-0 that there is no absolute immunity.

There may be some appetite for a public vs. private function, or motivation-based distinction so that there can be a qualified immunity of sorts. The discussion I think hides behind that is how does that process work. For cops, for example, I can raise the immunity at a motion to dismiss stage and if I lose in the trial court, take an appeal. Then even if I lose there, I can move for it again prior to trial. And if I lose that, I can appeal a second time. And if I lose all of those, and then try it and lose, I can appeal a third time.

The point is, it is an immunity from suit, itself. So it can be interposed at any point, and repeatedly. The fact that some questions were about the process, i.e. how would such an immunity (focused for example on a claim of public function) actually be raised. And then evaluated. And is it subject to appeal? I think those questions were designed to tease out the impracticality of the distinction suggested by Trump's team.

Let's say you send Seal Team 6 to kill your neighbor. Clearly, that is private. No one is saying you get immunity. What if you send Seal Team 6 to kill a terrorist leader? They would say public. But what if you send Seal Team 6 to kill a fellow politician because you, in good faith, think that person is a Russian spy?

Is it your subjective intent to protect the country that makes it a public function? Is it the mere fact that it was Seal Team 6 -- a military entity -- that makes it public.

So take 1/6 or the fake elector scheme. Is the fact that Trump thought he had won and the election was a fraud, so he was using the means of government to thwart it a public function? Or is it private because he did so to stay in power?

And who decides -- is that a jury question, or a judge one? All interesting questions. But as I say, all 9 of them likely had a very solid sense of how they come down on this some weeks ago.
 
#9,805
#9,805
85SugarVol said:
Are you saying you think it looks 7-2 at the moment that there is presidential immunity? Just a question of the line?
Click to expand...

tvolsfan said:
I can’t imagine that’s what he’s saying. That would be cartoonish, even for this court.
Click to expand...
It’s more like 7 (probably 9) think there is a line between acts that can be prosecuted and those that can’t. They’re going to come out in different places on where to draw the line between “can be prosecuted” and “immune from prosecution.”

Kavanaugh seemed to articulate the theory with the broadest presidential powers. Seems to think there has to be explicit language in the criminal statute applying the crime to the president. That is so far removed from the others that it’s basically 6 in favor of limited immunity. (Personally, I think that is a really great standard for core presidential functions or official acts).

Gorsuch seemed to want to follow a DC Circuit test that would require further proceedings and an eventual trial. I think this will ultimately get votes from Alito and Thomas because it’s helpful to Trump (more delay) without being too stupid to get a third vote.

Sotomayor and KBJ seemed focused on private acts vs. official acts, which is essentially the most helpful to the government without being too stupid to get a third vote.

Kagan and Barett both seemed up for grabs and actually did a good job of exploring presidential power and the DOJ attorney did a really good job answering those questions.

Roberts followed up some of Barrett’s questions in a way that made me lump them together but I don’t think that’s necessarily correct.

I’d seriously question the credibility of anybody dunking on either attorney or saying either side’s argument got destroyed. I’d say it’s a tossup with a team Gorsuch and, ultimately, team Kagan with the justices to the right/left of them signing on with wherever they land and then Roberts and Barrett are the swing votes. I think Kavanaugh will dissent from either side. The Trump attorney did some unusual things, but I don’t think there was really that much space between his position and DOJ to begin with. Getting there was a win for Trump.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and 85SugarVol
#9,807
#9,807
tvolsfan said:
Seems serious. Please explain why the charges being brought against him seem politically motivated and illegitimate.
Click to expand...
I said they have ties. And they do.

The federal case should be obvious.
Fani visited the WH and met with WH officials.
Hush money was dead before the former DOJ asset got involved.
 
#9,814
#9,814
#9,817
#9,817
lawgator1 said:
More just an observation that, even in the midst of a very serious legal discussion with long term ramifications, the Trump team couldn't help itself to make a campaign comment about immigration.

Cheap.
Click to expand...

Want me to list the times your party has used a shooting to advance a firearms agenda? I would be careful with that word “cheap”.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol since 77, UT_Dutchman, 82_VOL_83 and 1 other person
#9,818
#9,818
lawgator1 said:
More just an observation that, even in the midst of a very serious legal discussion with long term ramifications, the Trump team couldn't help itself to make a campaign comment about immigration.

Cheap.
Click to expand...
To be fair most of these court proceedings are political theatre intended to hurt his presidential chances.

Not that I care, I want him as far away from office as possible..... Right along with Biden. But I can't get everything I want.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol and InVOLuntary
#9,819
#9,819
KB5252 said:
To be fair most of these court proceedings are political theatre intended to hurt his presidential chances.

Not that I care, I want him as far away from office as possible..... Right along with Biden. But I can't get everything I want.
Click to expand...


It's Trump who asked the court for this review and argument. This was his doing.
 
#9,822
#9,822
lawgator1 said:
It's Trump who asked the court for this review and argument. This was his doing.
Click to expand...
And the catch 22 is that if blanket immunity is not granted and Trump manages to dodge convictions and is re-elected, Biden and his administration is at severe risk of legal trouble…..and the liberal judges know it
 
  • Like
Reactions: whodeycin85
#9,823
#9,823
Wireless1 said:
And the catch 22 is that if blanket immunity is not granted and Trump manages to dodge convictions and is re-elected, Biden and his administration is at severe risk of legal trouble…..and the liberal judges know it
Click to expand...
Yes, which is another reason that Obama is going to win this election at all costs. Obama is the one who is really being protected.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wireless1, 82_VOL_83, sonofUT62 and 2 others
#9,824
#9,824
The leftist liberal Twitter / X trolls are out in force today #scotusiscorrupt

They must of gotten their orders last night and at it hard since!
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top