1y ago

US Supreme Court sets April 25 Trump criminal immunity argument

www.reuters.com /world/us/us-supreme-court-sets-april-25-trump-criminal-immunity-argument-2024-03-06/

The U.S. Supreme Court has set April 25 as the date it will hear Donald Trump's claim of presidential immunity from prosecution on charges related to his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss - the last day of oral arguments of its current term.

The court released its updated argument calendar a week after it agreed to take up the case and gave the former president a boost by putting on hold the criminal prosecution being pursued by Special Counsel Jack Smith. It previously had disclosed which week it would hear the matter but had not given the precise date.

The justices will review a lower court's rejection of Trump's claim of immunity from prosecution because he was president when he took actions aimed at reversing President Joe Biden's election victory over him.

59 comments

The Supreme Court is sabotaging the Trump indictments by delaying a decision. The goal is to delay trial so he can’t be convicted so close to the election. This court is just an extension of the party.
- This court is just an extension of the party.
  Oh bull. I've been collecting examples of the Court NOT acting conservatively, let alone acting partisan. I'm no fan of this Court, and I loathe Thomas, but they make some surprising calls. If they were an organ of the GOP, none of these cases would have passed, OR, they would have heard them to shoot down the lower court rulings.
  https://old.lemmy.world/comment/8055718
  There was an earlier ruling where they shot Trump down, but I can't find it for all the noise over recent events.
  I'm kinda OK with them putting off the call on the immunity case, it's a weighty one, but I'm scared as hell they'll take too long to ponder the arguments. Calling it now: They reject Trump's claim. Just like they allowed him on the ballot, and the unanimity was telling, I think they understand the chaos that would ensue.
  
  Why do they need to put this off? Is there really a need to ponder over the question of 'is a president allowed to break laws with impunity?' Because it seems to me like there's only one answer there and it's "FUCK NO."
  
  Roe v. Wade. Your argument is invalid.
  
  Wow this list is quite damning.
  Supreme Court allows federal agents to cut razor wire Texas installed on US-Mexico border
  Omg the Supreme Court honors the federal governments right to control the boarder. So controversial and certainly something that would never get flipped on its head.
  Oh the SUPREME COURT didn't want to talk about $500 mask fines???
  This has to be satire.
I see this as a win-win.
Presidents have full immunity? Biden takes a shotgun to Trump and immediately resigns before impeachment. Maybe even a murder-suicide for funsies.
Presidents don't have full immunity? Trump goes to jail for the rest of his miserable life.
- That would imply Biden/democrats have any fucking balls. I would actually love it if Biden's team just went "Full immunity? Fuck it, we ball." and just go full hog wild and just push for wild things to actually help people and punish the literal fucking nazis.
  But it would be cool.
- "Oh, the president has immunity?" Asks the reaper drone as it prepared for takeoff
- Then head to the court, just to make sure they don't reverse themselves.
  
  If the president has total immunity, couldn't Biden just pack the court without any process? Why not just say he is the court now?
- This is exactly my read of the circumstances: Trump's bought and paid for SCOTUS says he WAS and WILL BE immune to all crimes committed while President. That automatically gives the sitting President until Jan 20 2025 to assassinate Trump. With impunity.
  "Hello, Seal Team Six? I have a job for you..."
- They will just narrowly craft it so it doesn't apply to Biden and there is nothing stopping them from overruling what they already did if it came down to it.
  You can't shame the shameless and as long as the Pope is calling the shots the court will do what he says to.
- That's exactly the problem. We want a definitive answer. Instead what we're getting is a hearing in April... and then June... August comes around... Suddenly there won't be a trial before the election and we risk electing an Autocrat.
- Biden wouldn't have the balls to so much as j walk even with immunity.
- This definitely won’t be an either or outcome. The SCOTUS rarely gives opinions that black and white (that’s why it’s there in the first place).
They’re going to say that in this specific situation he has immunity but will severely limit the scope of the ruling so that it doesn’t apply to any other president ever.
Calling it now.
- You might as well call August being warm or Christmas gifts of socks underwhelming.
  
  Christmas gifts of socks underwhelming.
  Woah there. Gifts of socks as a child, terrible gift. Gifts of socks as an adult, best Christmas gift.
I dunno why SCOTUS doesn't just announce their opinion now, because we all know what it will be anyways.
- They gotta make sure all the dark money has time to be transferred into their accounts.
- This is much craftier of them. Obviously they can't rule that a president can break any law they want and they know that, so they're delaying their ruling until after the election when it won't matter anymore.
Americans, please for the love of all that is good left in the world you need to organise the biggest protest your country has ever seen for that date.
It's not an exaggeration to day that the future of the wester world relies on you guys not bring apathetic for once and doing more than leaving comments on lemmy or reddit or wherever.
If its at all possible for you to make it down to Washington on that day, you need to. Or else you are sending the message, loud and clear, that you don't really give a shit that a rougue supreme court with openly and proudly corrupt judges has taken control of your country and gets to make the laws whatever the fuck they want.
Or if you can't make it to DC organise a local protest. Please just do fucking SOMETHING.
- Literally, it would do nothing. The supreme court will decide what it decides... They don't need to be elected.
  What does matter is voting in November and getting people to vote for Biden again rather than some third party nutter that won't even come close to 10% of the vote.
  
  The last three third party candidates who won more than one state were Strom Thurmond, George Wallace and Theodore Roosevelt.
  The first two won the south on account of regional anger at the civil rights movement.
  Roosevelt split the vote. 50.6% of the country voted for the Republican candidate or a former Republican, but the Democrat won a landslide with only 41% of the popular vote and 81% of the electoral college vote.
  The closest a third party candidate has ever come to winning is Breckenridge, who got 18% of the popular vote and 23.8% of the EC vote running as a Southern Democrat because the south didn't like Stephen Douglas (who got 29.5% of the popular vote but only won a single state).
  Voting third party basically doesn't work. Any time its been significant, it's just caused a spoiler effect.
- SCOTUS are corrupt, unaccountable dictators. They do not care what the American people think. They don't care what the Constitution says. They don't fear the American people. They rule by fiat.
Anyone have a good connection for bulk pitchforks? We should order now to save on shipping.
I'm happy they agreed to hear this, we need a solid ruling. I'm kinda OK with putting it 2-months out. Seems reasonable for such a weighty case. I am worried as to how long they take to make a ruling after hearing arguments.
They've already shot Trump down twice, they're hardly on his side, so no reason to drag this out. My main concern is they issue a ruling so precise that it's blurry. Does that make sense?
In other words, "Nah, he can't do that, but..."
- The DC courts had a bullet proof response already. SCOTUS should have let that stand and denied to hear any part of the immunity issue. That's what all the legal experts expected because it's the obvious correct choice.
  Instead SCOTUS broadened the question and added more things to rule on than what the DC appeals court stated in their ruling. That's not how law is supposed to work.
  The conservative majority is forcing this to delay the DC case. There is little to no chance the DC trial finishes before the election - as a direct result of the Supreme Court's decision here.
  The Supreme Court decided Bush v Gore in a matter of days, but we're waiting several weeks before they even start listening to immunity arguments? It's bullshit. The delay is the point.
- My main concern is they issue a ruling so precise that it's blurry.
  That sounds a lot like the constitutional amendment they just removed the teeth from. I'm scared to think how they will screw this one over; especially since we have an authoritarian on the table.
- Oh that’s definitely going to be it. Their job isn’t anything like a normal court and people don’t understand that or like it. Radiolab did a great series on the SCOTUS and how and why they make their decisions years ago. Really explained what their function actually is.
Well Pope Francis might die before that happens so there is at least a chance the Catholic Supreme Court will do the right thing. Here is hoping the Pope doesn't have much longer!

59 comments