Perhaps they are so appealing. The actual holder of the funds: The Court Registry Investment System.
Some accounts say the CRIS is “managed by the federal government” which would certainly explain why it’s failing to disburse the funds. Other descriptions state that the specific court handling the case has the power to disburse “when the judge issues a final order.”
My understanding was that a “final order” had been issued by that court. So outside of Trump’s lawyers making the clearly-false claim that SCOTUS is still going to be ruling on this matter at some future point, it’s tough to see a legitimate reason for the funds to be sitting in the escrow account.
Edit: There’s one case that I’m aware of where they’ve heard the appeal and changed their mind:
Reid vs. Covert, in which the wife of a service member was court martialed for killing her spouse. She was sentenced to life imprisonment. However, her attorney appealed, saying that a civilian non-service member couldn’t be held to the military’s rules, as she wasn’t a member of the military herself.
Absolutely not. When I look something up in Google, it’s to find a reputable source that has the information I need. I don’t rely on AI to do all the research for me, using who knows what as a source.
When people say they used Google, that’s typically what they mean. They used it to search. You asked AI. So, maybe that’s accurate, maybe not. Google AI is not itself a reliable source. At best it can lead you to one.
Considering that it led me to the Wiki for Reid v Covert, which specifically states that that’s the only time that SCOTUS has heard such an appeal and changed its mind, I think your criticism is a little unfounded here.
Nitpick me all you want, but I’d suggest going to the Pit about if you do. Nothing I cited is inaccurate, so maybe get that stick out of your ass about it.
Well, taking @Superdude’s cite at face value, I think that is great news. There is other news today about courts not having it with Trump’s vexatious litigation:
I just hope that Trump asking again doesn’t cause additional delays in Carroll getting paid. But looking at the Cornell law page on rule 44, I don’t see anything there saying the Supreme Court has to actually respond in any kind of time frame. So theoretically they can just sit on it forever unless there is some other rule that says a timeout equals a decision one way or the other.
Writer E. Jean Carroll finally has the $5 million — plus interest — that a jury ordered President Donald Trump to pay her in damages in one of her two cases against him, after Trump fought the payout for years.
Court records posted Tuesday show a transfer of $5,625,005.48 to Carroll’s legal team took place the day before.
To my way of thinking, it’s the same thing. It’s a common way for a court to handle the transfer of lodged funds, from their escrow account into the attorneys’ trust account, to disburse to the client.
Minus fees owed, yes. But my understanding is that EJC was doing it less for the money and more for vindication and punishment. Which has been achieved in part thus far. I’m sure she’s thrilled at Donald is gnashing his teeth about this.
It is almost over. From the NBC article: “Carroll plans to use the money from this Judgment to fund her retirement, and will place the award in an interest-bearing account” at least until Trump’s bid to get the Supreme Court to reconsider hearing his appeal is resolved, the filing said."