Posted on 07/01/2024 7:52:52 AM PDT by Dr. Franklin
The U.S. Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision along ideological lines, ruled that a former president has absolutely immunity for his core constitutional powers– and is entitled to a presumption of immunity for his official acts, but lack immunity for unofficial acts. . But at the same time, the court sent the case back to the trial judge to determine which, if any of Trump actions, were part of his official duties and thus were protected from prosecution.
That part of the court’s decision likely ensures that the case against Trump won’t be tried before the election, and then only if he is not re-elected. If he is re-elected, Trump could order the Justice Department to drop the charges against him, or he might try to pardon himself in the two pending federal cases.
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the court’s decision, joined by his fellow conservatives. Dissenting were the three liberals, Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson.
....
Monday's decision to send the case back to trial Judge Tanya Chutkan all but guarantees that there will be no Trump trial on the election interference charges for months. Even before the immunity case, Judge Chutkan indicated that trial preparations would likely take three months. Now, she will also have to decide which of the charges in the Trump indictment should remain and which involve official acts that under the Supreme Court ruling are protected from prosecution.
Even after Judge Chutkan separates the constitutional wheat from the chaff, Trump could seek further delays, as immunity questions are among the very few that may be appealed prior to trial.
(Excerpt) Read more at npr.org ...
 Hey! FReepers! Help Fill The Tank! How About It? Huh? It Ain't Askin' Too Much Ya Know.... Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
When you are the POTUS and the presidential election is stolen by the far left turd rollers, it is your job to raise hell and ask questions. There no longer any doubt that the election was stolen. Trump was doing his presidential job challenging the results.
My response was to:
1. the poster’s “before”, and to
2. the “business” adjective of the New York “business record” statute.
Paying one’s personal lawyer is 100% a private matter, not a presidential matter.
Let me make it perfectly clear:
Trump’s payments to Cohen, all made in 2017, were not “hush money” or campaign expenses for a 2016 election.
Biden could dissolve on stage and I still would not bet on Trump. American voter is too unpredictable.
Could somebody file for a stay on the voting machines demonstrated to be easily-manipulable being used in the upcoming election?
The best decision we could hope for. Blanket immunity would be a bad precedent for an already overpowered presidential office, but presidents need some latitude to act without constant legal jeopardy.
The Left need to keep in mind that if they got what they wanted as soon as Trump or another Republican wins office, Obama would likely get dragged into court (not that he doesn’t deserve it). Every future president would have to write a pardon for himself on his way out of office or be subject to continuous prosecution and legal harassment as soon as the opposing party comes into office.
I write separately to highlight another way in which this prosecution may violate our constitutional structure. In this case, the Attorney General purported to appoint a private citizen as Special Counsel to prosecute a former President on behalf of the United States. But, I am not sure that any office for the Special Counsel has been “established by Law,” as the Constitution requires. Art. II, §2, cl. 2. By requiring that Congress create federal offices “by Law,” the Constitution imposes an important check against the President—he cannot create offices at his pleasure. If there is no law establishing the office that the Special Counsel occupies, then he cannot proceed with this prosecution. A private citizen cannot criminally prosecute anyone, let alone a former President.
No former President has faced criminal prosecution for his acts while in office in the more than 200 years since the founding of our country. And, that is so despite numerous past Presidents taking actions that many would argue constitute crimes. If this unprecedented prosecution is to proceed, it must be conducted by someone duly authorized to do so by the American people. The lower courts should thus answer these essential questions concerning the Special Counsel’s appointment before proceeding.
Justice Thomas then proceeds to fully describe the dubious nature of the appointment. See pages 52-60 for the full Thomas concurrence.
Judge Cannon, no doubt, will refer to this issue and the Thomas opinion. She could disqualify Smith. It would bve the decisive blow.
Of course they will, but that’s why we have the Supreme Court!
Several, if not all, of the charged instances occurred while Trump was President.
“The claims that Trump was acting only in his own interest”
It needs to be understood that the results of the 2014 Ukrainian presidential election were questionable.
The official tally winner was driven out of Kiev by massive protests.
Many pro-Russian people in eastern Ukraine, seeing their man getting driven out, decided to try to separate from Ukraine.
War has now been going on over there for ten years.
The US needs to make its elections trustworthy so the US doesn’t wind up in a civil war.
The decision seems to be pretty broad and forces the lower courts to prove that a presidential act is “unofficial” before he can be prosecuted for it.
“Turning to some of the specific allegations against Trump, the majority ruled that Trump cannot be prosecuted for his alleged efforts to “leverage the Justice Department’s power and authority to convince certain States to replace their legitimate electors with Trump’s fraudulent slates of electors.”
With regard to the allegation that Trump attempted to pressure his former vice president, Mike Pence, in his role as president of the senate, to reject the states’ electoral votes or send them back to state legislatures, the court deemed Trump “presumptively immune” from prosecution on the theory that the president and vice president are acting officially when they discuss their official responsibilities. “
Divided along ideological lines....
Yep. Those judges who take the Constitution seriously vs. those judges who take their preferred political party’s power seriously.
The revocable trust means Trump was NOT in control at the time of the alleged offenses.
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.