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 ...
Probably best to read the Opinion first.
Immunity for “Official Acts” no immunity for unofficial acts.
Turley on FOX says this is a win for Trump.
6-3 President has total immunity for official acts.
caution ...
An ABSOLUTE WIN!
Praise God!
What defines an official act? Campaign rally? Presidential records?
LOL!
This is Roberts, after all, where’s the poison pill?
The court in Part III of its opinion indicates that in this case “no court has thus far considered how” to distinguish between official and unofficial acts.
4
Moreover, Roberts continues, “the lower courts rendered their decisions on a highly expedited basis” and “did not analyze the conduct alleged in the indictment to decide which of it should be categorized as official and which unofficial” — and it wasn’t briefed before the Supreme Court.
So, it appears the Stormy Daniels-type B.S. isn’t covered under this decision.
Why should an immunity for official acts in office be extended to the official’s family?
The argument that will be made is that the things for which he is being prosecuted were no official acts, but were acts taken in his personal capacity (the hush money case) or as a candidate, not as president (J6, documents, RICO case). Not saying that will prevail, just saying this isn’t over on any of the cases.
Back to lower courts to decide.
33
So the Supreme Court isn’t going to make that determination now. Instead, it will send the case back to the lower courts for further proceedings, although it does offer some guidance.
Re: 92 - probably best to read the Opinion.
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.