Mike Cernovich: SCOTUS most likely to rule against Trump while upholding presidential immunity generally. J6 will be outside of scope of immunity.

Mike Cernovich on Twitter X ^ | February 28, 2024 | Mike Cernovich

[escapefromboston]

I don’t take anything eCelebs say seriously.

[silent majority rising]

Like most ‘commentators’ or ‘reporters’, he doesn’t offer any basis for his opinion. He states you should just believe him ‘cause he is a lawyer. Thanks, like an a**hole, everyone has one (almost everyone).

[silent majority rising]

JAFO...

[desertsolitaire]

Would there have been any need for the Supremes to accept this case if they were going to rule against Trump? Wouldn’t letting the lower court ruling stand do the same thing if they anticipated ruling against? Not a lawyer but intensely interested. Thoughts?

[usafa92]

Cernovich is a nutjob. Never know what side of any issue he will be on.

[kabar]

What they will probably rule is that a President has immunity from criminal prosecution in the performance of his official duties. Trump’s case must then be tried using those parameters. Were his actions related to J6 considered to be within his official duties? I say yes.

[thegagline]

Would there have been any need for the Supremes to accept this case if they were going to rule against Trump?

The Court needs to set forth a unified standard when faced with the esoteric questions of ballot access, immunity, and the Constitution.

[Alberta's Child]

The more important point related to sovereign immunity is that a President should never be subject to prosecution by an Executive Branch department that operates under the direct oversight of the Office of the President of the United States. It’s even more ludicrous when you consider that the Justice Department didn’t even exist when the Constitution was written.

[Alberta's Child]

For most of this nation’s history, shooting a President wasn’t even a Federal crime. In the case of the Lincoln assassination, for example, I believe John Wilkes Booth was tried, convicted and executed under Maryland law.

[FlipWilson]

I agree with him. The Supreme Court will not treat this case as a Trump case. It will treat it as a Presidential Immunity case.

First question: Does it exist?

Predicted Answer: I think that they will say it does exist.

Second Question: Is it absolute?

Predicted Answer: I bet that they say it is not.

Third Question: If it isn’t absolute, what is the scope?

Predicted Answer: No idea where they draw the line but it wouldn’t be far fetched to say that they come down with a ruling that campaign related and election related actions are outside the scope as they are not directly related to performing Presidential duties, but rather, political duties.

End result: Trump is right, there is immunity, but he is wrong that it applies here.

Meanwhile, mission accomplished for the Trump team. The trial will be delayed and Trump will be the nominee long before he faces trial. Now, if Smith tries to jail the GOP nominee, it will be a whole other ball of wax, the kind that ends up resulting in a REAL split in the country.

[midwest_hiker]

SO when Obama violated the Fifth Amendment “with the avowed assassination of at least four American citizens, Anwar Al-Awlaki, his 16-year-old son, Samir Khan, and Jude Mohammed, without benefit of due process of law. Indeed, the death warrants against these individuals were effectively signed in secret, in a committee which is overseen directly by the president.”
Can Obama be charged, if actions are not immune.

[Baldwin77]

When exactly, was Trump convicted of insurrection ?

[thegagline]

The more important point related to sovereign immunity is that a President should never be subject to prosecution by an Executive Branch department that operates under the direct oversight of the Office of the President of the United States. It's even more ludicrous when you consider that the Justice Department didn't even exist when the Constitution was written.

Good points! However, the Office of Inspector General is a part of the Executive Branch and its purpose is to investigate and prosecute Article Two agencies [ executive branch]

[Paraclete]

I think the SCOTUS would prefer not to touch this case with a fifty foot pole given the ramifications. Now that the issue is being pushed they have no option but to make a decision and the only logical decision is to allow the Presidency full immunity while serving. Anything else will push the system into turmoil and severely wound the Executive Branch.

[Alberta's Child]

1. The OIG has no authority to prosecute cases against the President.

2. The President has plenary authority over the Executive Branch, which means he can overrule any decision by the OIG.

[justme4now]

Even the Democrat led Senate couldn't find him guilty!🤔

[maro]

I think that it would be hard to define “normal” in a way that makes policy sense.

[thegagline]

I think that it would be hard to define “normal” in a way that makes policy sense.

Typical, normal, within the parameters etc. That’s where the litigation often occurs in qualified sovereign immunity cases.

[HamiltonJay]

They won’t get rid of Presidential immunity, just don’t see that happening…

The question in my mind has always been whether this whole thing would fall under it or not. What exactly are the charges here…

[Macho MAGA Man]

That’s why I posted his Twitter post. Tomorrow he might say Trump should be jailed. He’s wishy washy.