DC Court of Appeals rules against Trump Immunity, SCOTUS Makes a Different Decision

The DC Court of Appeals has ruled that Trump cannot claim presidential immunity to avoid trial. However, can he get his rigged Supreme Court to take his case?

It’s a sign of our times that I breathe a heavy sigh of relief when something sane and sensible happens.

To add …

Can Chutkan proceed with an April start date for the DC case then? If not, why does she have to wait for Scotus?

It was a three judge panel who ruled unanimously. Two Biden appointees and one GHW Bush.

The rigged Supreme Court has a quandary. If they say Trump is immune then so is Biden and Biden can overthrow the next election if he loses with no consequence (or do anything like having the judges arrested).

I like your thinking!

I will make a bold prediction. The Supreme Court will not take this case.

This is why the very question of absolute presidential immunity is asinine on it’s face. If the Supreme Court rules in Trump’s favor on this (which they won’t) then Biden can order Seal Team 6 to whack any of his political opponents the day after.

The question boils down to: “Is the president of the US a supreme dictator?”

I wholeheartedly agree.

They also released the stay which means the trial proceedings start immediately. The stay remains lifted if he asks for an en blanc.

Yes, we discussed this possibility that they had this plan when they rejected Smith’s application for an expedited hearing. At face value it seems improbable, but there’s an argument for it. To the extent they are sick of Trump, it’s politically much more palatable for them simply to refuse to hear this case and effectively commit him to a prompt trial in DC that could scupper him; whereas ruling against him on the 14A case is much more difficult for them.

I don’t think there’s any question that the SC would eventually rule against him. I think this is entirely about whether they agree to hear the case and enable him to delay the DC trial.

When they rejected Smith’s application for an expedited hearing, it could have been because they decided to allow Trump maximum possible delay by forcing it to go through DC appeals before they hear it; or it might just have been that their plan was to minimize delay by refusing to grant cert at all. And so far as I’m aware we have no hint which it is, because in rejecting Smith they didn’t give reasons (nor would they usually do so).

I suppose different justices might have had different reasons for the same decision.

That’s true. Kagan, for example, would evaluate the language and caselaw in context, and Thomas would listen closely for instructions from the extradimensional spaceworms broadcasting from the moon.

Or whoever will give him a ride on their yacht and buy him an RV.

And are you implying that this is not an originalist position?

4c6f2b04-4bac-4d61-91e2-49c96f54696b.pdf (washingtonpost.com)

here is the 57 page pdf. enjoy!

I really wish people would stop claiming this as an example. He could order it and it would not happen as it’s clearly an illegal order.

I think it is shorthand. I am pretty sure the president could find someone to do it. Bush got people to torture people.

Hell, Biden could do it himself. Schedule a meeting with his opponents and then start shooting.