http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3800722/posts
The scotus decision is at the above link.
Dershowitz says that Scotus just acknowledged the President’s right to take subpoena’s to the courts for a court decision because of separation of powers.
If that weren’t the case, then the scotus would not have accepted the case
THANK YOU SO MUCH...........I have been going nutz trying to find the video to understand what he said...that is it, again Thank you
Since President Trump clearly has committed none of these, the Supreme Court should declare the "impeachment" unconstitutional.
The argument that high crimes and misdemeanors means whatever the members of the House of Representatives say it is is spurious. Obviously a crime must have been committed, either a misdemeanor or a high crime or treason or bribery, and, if not, there is no legal--i.e. no constitutional--basis for impeachment. President Trump has committed no crime.
For the Supreme Court to rule on this would, in fact, protect the separation of powers.
I've not yet read the decision (me bad), but my baseline reaction on this issue is straightforward. Presidents and Congress have been at odds on subpoenas and privilege claims from time immemorial. I cannot remember ANY administration, of either party, in which the issue did not arise from time to time. The particular matters at issue varied widely; some were grave, some not, but presidents have always insisted that they had some things that they were not obligated to share with Congress.
The courts have ALWAYS adjudicated these disputes.
Sometimes the president wins in court and Congress drops the claim. Sometimes Congress wins, and Nixon turns over the tapes (among many, many examples that might be recalled). Sometimes they fight the issue all the way to the Supreme Court, and the whole thing becomes moot because the president has left office before the courts can labor their way through to a decision. But the courts ALWAYS decide.
The Democrats are now claiming an utterly unlimited subpoena power, lacking any opportunity for appeal. This is risible. That this claim is being taken seriously is yet another signal of the complete collapse of integrity on the part of the media.