Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2024/02/06/trump-still-cant-shoot-people-on-5th-avenue.html
…
8 Likes
SCOTUS has already refused to take the case once, I doubt they would change that decision now.
6 Likes
I certainly hope that you’re right but what SCOTUS refused was Jack Smith’s request back in December to fast-track a review of the immunity question, thereby bypassing the lower courts and all the delays associated with appeals. Smith assumed that the question would eventually make it up to the Supreme Court anyway so he just wanted it to get resolved ASAP so that the Trump lawyers couldn’t drag out the process until after the election. Their refusal to grant his request shouldn’t necessarily be interpreted as a good sign.
16 Likes
If memory serves, SCOTUS refused the first time because it had not yet been heard by the lower court. Hopefully, though, they will pass on it again, letting the lower ruling stand.
7 Likes
This little tidbit from this article is infuriating:
The former president has signaled that he could seek to dismiss the federal cases against him in the District of Columbia and Florida if he regains the White House. His lawyer in Georgia recently suggested Trump may try to delay the election interference case against him in Fulton County, Ga., until 2029.
1 Like
If he is alive in 2029 I will be amazed at the medical miracle. Given the rate of his cognitive decline he won’t be feeding himself much longer.
7 Likes
Hm. Do the police have any unsolved shooting deaths near 5th avenue in their case files?
4 Likes
When will we finally get that crossed-fingers response option.
4 Likes
I hope he completely drains Republican coffers that go to paying for attorneys instead of election expenses.
12 Likes
The longer that the Supreme Court puts off having to make important decisions about Trump‘s culpability and eligibility, the greater the odds of a full blown Civil War.
Imagine for example a scenario in which Trump wins the electoral college only for Congress to disqualify him from taking office because SCOTUS never weighed in. Or a scenario in which he’s kept off some state ballots and not others. Or a scenario in which Trump is convicted and sentenced to prison shortly after the election but before taking office. A nightmare that would make J6 look trivial by comparison.
No decision could be even more disastrous than a bad decision. SCOTUS needs to stop punting on these questions and create legal clarity now.
13 Likes
I mean, it is a bit of a mixed bag, putting a bunch of money into the hands of the kind of lawyers that would have him for a client, but yeah, on the whole positive that it won’t be funding something like a national Willie Horton ad.
4 Likes
It’s bothersome that people less moral and less capable than Alina Habba will be getting their grubby hands on money, but many of them will get stiffed, or get sucked into his mob culture and go to prison themselves, and it may lead to less money going towards Tom Cotton or Ted Cruz’s election funds.
4 Likes
In this case, punting is the correct decision, though. We have a lower court and an appeals court who agree that Trump’s blanket immunity claim doesn’t hold water. It’s not like there’s a circuit split for SCOTUS to resolve. No other court has found that Trump does have immunity. His arguments border on frivolous. There’s no real legal question worthy of SCOTUS’s involvement here. They should just deny cert when Trump appeals to them, which will let the DC Court of Appeals holding stand. And that will be that.
17 Likes
I suspect that they’re afraid to rule on it, because they know if they go against Trump, they’ll become targets of even more right wing threats… But yeah, they absolutely need to weigh in here.
Yeah, and that’s why I think that he’s primarily using this as a stalling tactic, since he’s known for drawing shit out as long as possible in court. Anything he can do to stall…
11 Likes
They could’ve taken the fast track approach requested by Jack Smith given the urgency of the questions at stake, but opted not to. Big mistake IMHO.
9 Likes
This whole loyalty-trumps-law thing… From the raw story:
“Defense lawyer Alina Habba has already begun sending public messages on conservative media to Supreme Court justices.
“You know, people like Kavanaugh, who the president fought for, who the president went through hell to get into place,” Habba said.”
Is that how the Supreme Court works - you demand loyalty from the justices?
6 Likes
There are some serious downsides that come with the whole “lifetime appointment” thing but “not being beholden to politicians for their job security” is a feature that has generally worked as intended.
9 Likes
Correct. They have ruled against Trump several times already. Trump may think they owe him, but they clearly don’t think that. Now…some of them do act like they owe other people, so it’s not all good news.
11 Likes
I’d say the ones who’d vote to give him immunity against criming are Alito and Thomas…Who he did not appoint.
14 Likes
That just gave me a great idea. The Biden campaign should put out an attack ad on trump that is nearly verbatim about the Willie Horton ad, but it’s trump instead. I mean, what he’s asking for is “revolving door prisons”, but just for himself.
ETA: Its been years since I’ve seen that ad, so it may not be a perfect fit, but I love the general idea. “Criminals and rapists free to destroy your community… well, at least one of them.”
2 Likes
