Sorry, you CANNOT appeal from a state trial court to the US Supreme Court. There is no way to do it. End of discussion.
Answering your question to me, Fifth amendment double-jeopardy only applies in criminal cases, and then only in cases brought by the same “sovereign.” You can be independently prosecuted by a state and the feds for the same crime. The concepts of res judicata and collateral estoppel are applicable to civil cases. Further, if you refuse to answer a question in a civil case on Fifth amendment self-incrimination grounds, the judge can and will direct the jury that they may infer based on your non-answer that you are refusing to answer because you have committed a crime.
In the 8th amendment, fines are lumped in with bail and cruel and unusual punishment - both criminal concepts.
Everyone is focusing on this "trial," but this was the post-trial penalty phase.
IIRC, the judge made a summary judgement based on Letitia James' motion, so President Trump never had a fact-trial to present evidence; he only got to present witnesses for mitigating the penalty.
First, do you agree with this characterization of what happened?
And second, how does a summary judgement in lieu of a trial impact an appeal?
-PJ
I know it's been a month, but I'd like to revisit this concept with you.
First, on the "lumping" of clauses implying a limit, boundary, or constraint on its application (e.g., "both criminal concepts"):
The Bill of Rights is full of bundles:
I don't think any conclusions can be made on the scope of the amendment based solely on what was bundled together. To that point, I'd argue that the fine against President Trump of half a billion dollars is so excessive as to be figuratively a de facto death sentence. It was imposed with the knowledge that it was unobtainable, which should make it unconstitutional.
Saying that the 8th amendment only applies to criminal cases because only criminal cases have bail would go against the prior bundling of unrelated protections (e.g., grand jury indictment and takings for public use; freedom of worship and redress of grievances).
Second, I would argue that the 8th amendment doesn't apply to "criminal cases," it applies to the people as an endowed right along with the other endowed rights in the Bill of Rights.
To that point, it's the people who have a protection against excessive fines, period. The right belongs to the person, not to the type of trial being held. The 8th amendment is agnostic on the type of infraction that resulted in the fine. In fact, the word "crime" does not exist in the 8th amendment, implying that 7th amendment civil findings of "liable" are also covered by the 8th amendment right of the people to be protected from the imposing of "excessive fines."
-PJ