Posted on 07/17/2023 4:29:23 PM PDT by Responsibility2nd
The Georgia Supreme Court Monday declined to take up an effort from former President Donald Trump to quash an investigation into his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results in the state.
The unanimous decision from the court’s nine justices was swiftly delivered just days after Trump’s legal team asked the court Friday to block an investigation by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis (D).
~snip~
Following his loss in the 2020 presidential election, Trump asked Georgia’s secretary of state to “find” another 11,780 votes to launch him to victory.
His campaign also organized a slate of false electors to certify he had won the election in the state.
Willis has yet to bring charges against Trump but suggested a high-profile case could be filed in August.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
It didn’t climb the hierarchy of the court system. Instead, Trump’s attorneys filed the writs directly in the Supreme Court, wrongly bypassing the Superior Court. The Supreme Court noted this in the first page of the opinion.
Yes, for not understanding the hierarchy of the Georgia Court system. You can't just file a Writ in the Supreme Court because you don't think that the Rules of Criminal Procedure and Appellate Procedure apply to your client.
Too many people think that the rules don’t or shouldn’t apply to him.
Absolutely.
Actually it's your understanding of the hierarchy of the GA Court System that is lacking. Should I trash you for that? Trump's lawyers claimed in their original 500 page filing that the lower court decision was unconstitutional to the GA Constitution.
According to GA Court State rules, such unconstitutional petitions are ONLY handled by the GA Supreme Court.
Look it up.
Too many people don't understand the rules. For example you.
So why exactly should the Georgia Supreme Court have taken his case, rather than expecting him to follow the standard process?
And the Court has made clear that a petitioner cannot invoke this Court’s original jurisdiction as a way to circumvent the ordinary channels for obtaining the relief he seeks without making some showing that he is being prevented fair access to those ordinary channels. See Gay v. Owens, 292 Ga. 480, 482-483 (738 SE2d 614) (2013) (original jurisdiction exercised only in extremely rare cases); Brown v. Johnson, 251 Ga. 436 (306 SE2d 655) (1983) (same); Kitchens v. State, 228 Ga. 624 (187 SE2d 268) (1972) (Supreme Court is a court for the correction of errors of law committed in the trial court). Petitioner’s claim fails in the light of that precedent; he makes no showing that he has been prevented fair access to the ordinary channels. Notably, Petitioner does not assert that the superior court has denied him the opportunity or ability to seek therein the relief he now requests from this Court. Indeed, he admits that, in March 2023, he submitted, and the superior court clerk filed, motions in which he sought to quash the Special Purpose Grand Jury’s report and to disqualify Willis. And, although he complains that Judge McBurney has yet to rule on those motions, he is not asking this Court to compel Judge McBurney to rule.2 Instead, he is asking this Court to step in and itself decide the motions currently pending in the superior court. This is not the sort of relief that this Court affords, at least absent extraordinary circumstances that Petitioner has not shown are present here.
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.