Posted on 07/15/2024 8:04:31 PM PDT by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas
“This is how republics collapse.” Those ominous words captured the hand-wringing, hair-pulling reaction to the dismissal of the Florida case against Donald Trump by Judge Aileen Cannon.
It was not just that she reached a conclusion long supported by some conservative lawyers and a Supreme Court justice.
To rule in favor of Trump in such a dismissal is, once again, the end to Democracy as we know it.
The 93-page order methodically goes through the governing cases and statutes for the appointment of prosecutors. There has long been a debate over how an attorney general like Merrick Garland can circumvent the constitutional process for the appointment of a U.S. Attorney and unilaterally elevate a citizen to wield even greater power.
With the expiration of the Independent Counsel Act in 1999, attorneys general have long relied upon their inherent authority to appoint “inferior officers” to special counsel investigation. The issue has never been conclusively ruled upon by the Supreme Court, even though lower courts have rejected this challenge.
SEE ALSO DONALD TRUMP Supreme Court’s Trump immunity ruling is what the body was designed for — unpopular but constitutionally correct The Trump ruling is certainly an outlier and the odds favor prosecutor Jack Smith on appeal. Many point to a challenge in 2019 in the D.C. Circuit to the appointment of Robert Mueller. The court found that “binding precedent establishes that Congress has ‘by law’ vested authority in the Attorney General to appoint the Special Counsel as an inferior officer.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
The same people who are supporting Smith in his ILLEGAL efforts would sue for lots of ZEROs if a NON qualified SURGEON worked on them & it didn’t go quite right.
GARLAND is in the same boat.
HE DIDN’T so the steps necessary to Appoint Smith
Indeed.
True ….. if DOJ admits that his appoint was wrong. They have to find another patsy to fall on that sword.
No one working will be allowed because they’re corrupted and a conflict of interest.
And the President can lay out even more evidence.
LOL! That would completely destroy them. But I don’t want the SC to be extremely one sided because you still want them to be impartial. Single party rule rarely works out well.
Instead Trump should merely suggest that he wants to do what the leftists want (and make sure that everyone knows that it’s their idea) and talk about raising the SC to 13 jurists.
It is pretty obvious that she's been working on it a while and wanted to leave as few opportunities for liberal appellate judges to claim "error".
It was also pretty obvious near the end that she'd had it with Smith's arrogance.
Where is the “freaking out?”
Headline doesn’t match the article. Whatever
It’s an editorial. It’s not pretending to be a straight news article.
It’s very unlikely that Turley wrote the title. My guess is that some clickbait artist did.
Thanks
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.