Posted on 07/01/2024 6:33:16 AM PDT by CFW
The Supreme Court will be issuing Opinions at 10:00 a.m. this morning for the October 2023 term. You can read the opinions released thus far at Supreme Court opinions.
The attorneys at scotusblog will be liveblogging the release of opinions from the pressroom.
There are four cases remaining undecided for the October 2023 term.
October sitting: All opinions have been released;
November sitting: All opinions have been released;
December sitting: All opinions have been released;
January sitting: All opinions have been released.
February sitting: There are three cases pending.
Corner Post v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, (an Administrative Procedure Act issue), and the two First Amendment cases. Moody v. NetChoice, LLC, and NetChoice, LLC v. Paxton.
March sitting: All opinions have been released.
And then there is the case we are all waiting for from the...
April setting: There is one case remaining undecided.
Which is the case of Trump v. U.S., No. 23-939 [Arg: 4.25.2024]
Issue(s): Whether and if so to what extent does a former president enjoy presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his tenure in office.
Opinion days are fun but nerve-racking. Join the fun, post your comments and insights here at the thread, and, say a prayer for the Justices!
(Excerpt) Read more at scotusblog.com ...
God is truly in control. The Dems just don’t get it yet.
Pres Trump’s recent Truth ...
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
·
1m
BIG WIN FOR OUR CONSTITUTION AND DEMOCRACY. PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN!
The good news is that the lower courts will first have to decide which parts of the voluminous phony indictments are "official" vs. "unofficial" conduct, which should take us well past the election.
Sotomoyer has a long dissent where she cherry-picks everything Trump supposedly did as part of his ‘conspiracy’ and then notes that the Constitution is silent about prosecuting _former_ Presidents for crimes... notwithstanding that Trump was actually the President at the time, of course, and she seems to walk a razor-thin line about preferring prosecution for official acts after leaving office.
At first glance, it seems as if she’s arguing this: suppose a (real) perp strikes an immunity plea deal with a D.A. to rat out co-conspirators for a crime. Everybody signs off and the guy is released. A month later, he’s re-arrested and prosecuted when the same D.A. says “oh, that immunity deal has expired now that you’re no longer in a position to help us.”
How does this affect next week’s “sentencing”?
McCarthy says big win for all Presidents, can’t delve in to the President’s “state of mind and motivation”.
McCarthy-Luntz? That McCarthy?
Final substantive paragraph: "The president enjoys no immunity for his unofficial acts, and not everything the President does is official. The President is not above the law. But Congress may not criminalize the President's conduct in carrying out the responsibilities of the Executive Branch under the Constitution."
As the apocryphal adage goes, “God looks out for drunks, little children, and the United States of America.”
Andy
“How does this affect next week’s “sentencing”?”
It doesn’t. Merchan is going to do whatever Merchan and his overlords want to do.
Andrew McCarthy - lawyer now on FOX
Oops. That thread was pulled. Someone jumped the gun.
But signs are looking good.
Okay, thanks.
Just wanted to confirm :-)
Imagine that. An entitlement that the communists are against, for once.
Amen.
Although the case occurred prior to Trump presidency, the judge did use federal election as part of the crime.
Yeah that’s what turley said would happen right move now they have to conclude what was official and what wasn’t
Turley says he doesn’t understand how this doesn’t cause cardiac arrest in the special counsel’s office, LOL
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.