Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Special counsel asks Supreme Court to rule on Trump’s immunity in Jan. 6 case
DNYUZ ^ | 12/11/2023 | Staff

Posted on 12/11/2023 12:09:48 PM PST by thegagline

Special counsel Jack Smith’s team has asked the Supreme Court to step in and decide the issue of presidential immunity regarding former President Donald Trump’s federal election interference charges.

Smith is asking the court to immediately resolve the issue, to prevent any delay of the March 4 trial date.

“Respondent’s appeal of the ruling rejecting his immunity and related claims, however, suspends the trial of the charges against him, scheduled to begin on March 4, 2024,” the special counsel wrote in a filing Monday. “It is of imperative public importance that respondent’s claims of immunity be resolved by this Court and that respondent’s trial proceed as promptly as possible if his claim of immunity is rejected.”

In October, Trump’s legal team filed its first motion to dismiss the case, citing what Trump’s lawyers claim is his “absolute immunity” from prosecution for actions taken while serving in the nation’s highest office.

The judge overseeing the case, D.C. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, rejected the motion.

Trump has appealed to the circuit court and asked for all proceedings to be stayed in the matter, pending appeal. Over the weekend, Smith’s team said the district court should deny the request to halt the proceedings.

Trump in August pleaded not guilty to charges of undertaking a “criminal scheme” to overturn the results of the 2020 election by enlisting a slate of so-called “fake electors,” using the Justice Department to conduct “sham election crime investigations,” trying to enlist the vice president to “alter the election results,” and promoting false claims of a stolen election as the Jan. 6 riot raged — all in an effort to subvert democracy and remain in power.

(Excerpt) Read more at dnyuz.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 20210106; 202308; 20230i; 202310; 202403; 20240304; chutkan; harassment; immunity; impeachment; j6; jacksmith; lawfare; persecution; president; prosecution; scotus; tanyachutkan
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last
To: thegagline

Do the Federal courts have the courage to rule...and rule correctly...here? I doubt it.


21 posted on 12/11/2023 12:35:53 PM PST by Gay State Conservative (Proudly Clinging To My Guns And My Religion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thegagline

This piece of pure human scum, Smith, should have beenn disbarred years ago.

The Judicial Branch is out of control and some balls in Congress need to do some checks and balances. Unfortunately, all the balls in Congress belong to a few GOP women.


22 posted on 12/11/2023 12:36:23 PM PST by Fledermaus (It's time to get rid of the Three McStooges; Mitch, Kevin and Ronna! 1 gone, 1 almost dead. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pete Dovgan

P.S. — Legally, the Senate did not hold a trial for an impeached President. He was an impeached ex-President, which meant it was treated no differently than an impeachment of any other Federal official (a Federal judge, for example).


23 posted on 12/11/2023 12:37:50 PM PST by Alberta's Child (If something in government doesn’t make sense, you can be sure it makes dollars.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: thegagline

We are all living through the transition of the USA from a Republic to an empire/government technocracy.

Its the 4th branch of government, the permanent deep-state, against Trump.


24 posted on 12/11/2023 12:37:50 PM PST by PGR88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thegagline

I agree. As Robert Gouveia Esq. pointed out, “If the President believes a federal election was fraudulently held, the President must address the issue as part of his executive duties.


25 posted on 12/11/2023 12:39:34 PM PST by batazoid (Plainclothes cop at Capital during Jan 6 riot...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Qwapisking

+1


26 posted on 12/11/2023 12:42:13 PM PST by sauropod (The obedient always think of themselves as virtuous rather than cowardly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: PGR88

Agreed. Matt Taibbi and Walter Kirn discussed this at length in their December 1 podcast America This Week. The government, corporations, and campuses are colluding to censor and suppress anything that is contrary to the Democrat agenda.


27 posted on 12/11/2023 12:47:20 PM PST by thegagline (Sic semper tyrannis! Goldwater in 2024)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: thegagline

Link to the petition:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-624/292946/20231211115417267_No.%2023-624%20U.S.%20v.%20Donald%20J.%20Trump%20Petition.pdf

Important so YOU can read what Smith wrote, instead of what someone else says Smith wrote.

I’d be surprised if SCOTUS takes this case now, as the issue has not even been argued at the appellate level.


28 posted on 12/11/2023 12:52:07 PM PST by Fury
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thegagline

This is simply Smith trying to get ahead of his coming defeat in being able to blame SCOTUS that his sham trial couldn’t get started before the election season.


29 posted on 12/11/2023 12:55:02 PM PST by nesnah (Infringe - act so as to limit or undermine [something]; encroach on)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tennmountainman
The SC will not expedite Thug Jack Smith’s request.

Agreed.

30 posted on 12/11/2023 12:55:48 PM PST by Fury
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: thegagline

If the SC rules against Trump, Joe Biden and others will be open to similar prosecutions. If they uphold Trump’s assertion, Jack Smith will hand his case over to a Soros DA who will carry on. These cases aren’t a matter of law for the left, they’re vehicles to occupy DJTs time and money. Lawfare for a better word, that those on the left cheer on, along with the NeverTrump clique on the right.


31 posted on 12/11/2023 12:56:35 PM PST by JonPreston ( ✌ ☮️ )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thegagline

So there’s all kinds of rush to prosecute Trump in the midst of election season, but even BEFORE Biden declared for the 2020 race, Trump was publicly warned not to have any investigation of Biden’s (or his son’s) prior activities (for which there was no possible immunity), lest it be considered “election interference.”

Yeah. Uh-huh. I see. Biggest f’ing double standard out there - if you’re a Dem, you get of scot-free on EVERYTHING, but if you’re a MAGA Republican (or THE MAGA Republican, Mr. Orange Man Bad himself), then everything an everything is on the table.

Nice way to destroy ANY confidence in the government being a neutral arbiter (not that I’ve had any illusions of that for a few decades) and, hence, nice way to destroy the country. Rules for thee, but not for me - yeah, F that!


32 posted on 12/11/2023 1:03:17 PM PST by Ancesthntr (“The right to buy weapons is the right to be free.” ― A.E. Van Vogt, The Weapons Shops of Isher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: where's_the_Outrage?

The Chief Justice is/was not part of Trump’s impeachment proceedings.


33 posted on 12/11/2023 1:06:15 PM PST by Sacajaweau ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: tennmountainman

“The SC will not expedite Thug Jack Smith’s request.”


Exactly. The USSC doesn’t like to grant emergency appeals to undercut lower courts, when those lower courts haven’t yet had the opportunity to formally rule on a case. Afterwards, if there’s a Constitutional issue, they may and may not take the case, but VERY rarely before a Circuit Court has ruled. We are seeing this in all kinds of “emergency” appeals of the various gun-related cases that are working their way through the system lately.

FYI, a great YouTube channel to watch regarding how the courts operate WRT gun cases is “The Four Boxes Diner” hosted by Mark Smith, who’s tried many cases before the Supremes, and who’s papers have often been cited in arguements/briefs before the Court. No, I’m not related to him, don’t work for him, don’t know him at all - I just think that he gives lots of good insights WRT how the courts work, and that his predictions of rulings is usually spot-on.


34 posted on 12/11/2023 1:10:00 PM PST by Ancesthntr (“The right to buy weapons is the right to be free.” ― A.E. Van Vogt, The Weapons Shops of Isher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: thegagline

We are inching to a civil war.


35 posted on 12/11/2023 1:10:38 PM PST by redgolum (We are not going to make it, are we. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child; All

How many times was Pres Trump impeached?

And when?


36 posted on 12/11/2023 1:10:43 PM PST by qaz123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: where's_the_Outrage?

I’m reconsidering my response on the necessity of Roberts for the second trial.


37 posted on 12/11/2023 1:11:10 PM PST by Sacajaweau ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: where's_the_Outrage?

https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/01/roberts-will-not-preside-over-impeachment-trial/


38 posted on 12/11/2023 1:13:49 PM PST by Sacajaweau ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

“It actually made a lot of sense. If Trump had been convicted in the Senate, they would have sought to disqualify him from holding Federal office again as the penalty.”


But it wouldn’t have been a valid conviction if the CJ wasn’t presiding. So it was actually pointless from a legal POV - and the Dems (and traitor-publicans like Liz Cheney) knew it from Day One.

The ONLY point was to try to further tarnish Trump’s reputation in the public eye, but IMHO it actually enhanced it. Trump is Teflon - every single thing that he’s accused of falls by the wayside, as he’s innocent. It backs up his claim that, “They’re not after me, they’re after you; I’m just in the way.”


39 posted on 12/11/2023 1:14:13 PM PST by Ancesthntr (“The right to buy weapons is the right to be free.” ― A.E. Van Vogt, The Weapons Shops of Isher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: where's_the_Outrage?

He wasn’t President at the time of the trial. I sent a link that explains.


40 posted on 12/11/2023 1:14:46 PM PST by Sacajaweau ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson