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.
Great news. What concerns me is there are 3 justices who dissented. So, to them, it’s o.k. for a jury not to have a unanimous decision to convict even though its against the law.
Fake news is now breaking news?
Par for the course for right wing media. Seen a lot of these lately.
Thank you!
How so?
No judge in New York state is going to throw it out though.
Kangaroo courts do not acknowledge SCOTUS authority and rulings.
“The entire State of NY looks like a Clown Show.”
The People’s Republic of New York is run by Stalinists.
They are very serious.
They need to be taken seriously, because just like Hitler and Stalin, they have the power.
yeah, that's kind of silly but it's also totally irrelevant.
The reversible error at issue here is the Judge's bad faith jury instructions, not how the jury ruled.
In effect, Trump’s conviction has been reversed. Poor Joe, he was all set to call Trump a convict.
Front page is a valid American English idiom for top of stack and will remain so even if newspapers completely vanish.
Stop the madness. Trump’s conviction will be overturned.
“I’ve never heard of a case in which a conviction didn’t have to be unanimous.”
It was unanimous.
It received a mild mention, on SCOTUS thread, here ..
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4245751/posts?page=59#59
"SCOTUS Ruling Deems Trump’s New York Conviction Unconstitutional on Two Key Grounds"
As a side note to this thread, please consider the following.
If I understand the Court's decision correctly, given 18 U.S. Code § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law, isn't anti-Trump NYC judge possibly due some fines and/or jail time for alleged outcome-driven Trump trial?
"Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death." --18 U.S. Code § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law
Constitution-respecting Trump supporters need to effectively "impeach and remove" worthless, OBiden-supporting state and federal career lawmakers and executives in November. Democratic and Republican patriots need to support hopeful Trump 47 with a new, Constitution-respecting Congress, not only so that he will not be a lame duck president from the first day of his second term, but will support him to quickly finish draining the swamp.
In the Biden administration, SCOTUS’ ruling has very little value.
It took me a few posts and googles to figure out what was fact and fiction. This is an opinion piece, not breaking news. The case is not about Trump. It may be a good case to build an appeal of the farce NY conviction on, but it will have to be argued in court in the future. This was not SCOTUS ruling against Bragg, and the title is very misleading.
Not reversed in any way, shape or form. Turley says that case does not fit Trump’s case.
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.