Posted on 06/25/2024 9:17:23 AM PDT by Red Badger
The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) delivered two precedent-setting rulings that could significantly impact former President Donald Trump’s criminal convictions.
In a decisive 6-3 decision in the Erlinger vs United States case, the Supreme Court ruled that juries must be unanimous on each criminal count, a standard not met in Trump’s New York case, where the jury returned a 4-4-4 verdict on the underlying crime.
This ruling underlines that Trump’s conviction was unconstitutional and must be overturned. During Trump’s New York trial, the judge had instructed the jury that unanimity on the specific crimes was unnecessary, as long as they agreed that a crime had taken place.
Additionally, SCOTUS ruled that sentencing enhancements cannot be arbitrarily implemented by judicial fiat, further solidifying the protections against unjust legal procedures.
These rulings have profound implications for Trump’s legal battles, particularly the controversial case led by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, and the bogus J6 1512(c) charges and sentencing enhancements that corrupt federal judges have announced they will implement if the Supreme Court nukes 1512(c).
The Supreme Court’s decisions underscore the necessity for unanimous jury verdicts in criminal convictions and proper judicial processes in sentencing enhancements, casting doubt on the validity of current and future proceedings against Trump.
I don’t doubt it. But others are posting as if it were newly revealed news.
I can’t find this item on any “normal” news site.
When they did report on the case, they just skimmed over it, saying it could possibly, might, probably, conceivably be of some minor help to Trump..........................
No it wasn't. They all agreed he did something wrong, but when it came to deciding exactly what it was, the jury was all over the place.
Looks like this recent Supreme Court verdict is going to result in the case being overturned for failure to give Trump a fair trial.
Lol
When can “Judge” Merchan be disrobed? What an intellectually dishonest human being he is. It's outrageous.
“No it wasn’t. They all agreed he did something wrong, but when it came to deciding exactly what it was, the jury was all over the place.”
They all agreed he was guilty of the specific charges.
"Disrobed" means "to strip naked." I think you mean "disbarred."
If you mean stripped of his judgeship, that requires impeachment, trial, conviction and removal by the state legislature.
The news stories I read said they didn't. You are mistaken.
I wonder if Merchan will even pay attention to the ruling.
Joesbucks was insufferable.
Precedence vs Trump specific
“The news stories I read said they didn’t. You are mistaken.”
Cite one.
If you were to give jury instructions that said, you can take his race into account or his sexuality can be a determining factor would that be lawful? It seems logical to me to assume that the jury instructions should be in accordance with the law. I’m just trying to understand the thinking here. I don’t think anything will happen to benefit Trump from a legal perspective so long as he’s not President.
New York is a Stalinist State. They will just ignore SCOTUS
Lawyers can be disbarred.
I should have used the word “removed”, although I think he should be stripped naked as well.
https://dgladishlaw.com/can-judges-be-removed-from-the-bench-and-suspended-from-the-practice-of-law/
Of course I realize this ridiculous excuse of a “Judge” will never be brought to justice in the State of New York.
Outstanding, great news for everybody.
👍
Naw, i'm good. I read it on Free Republic, so it's got to be right.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.