Justices seem split on immunity for Trump and a speedy January 6 trial.
If there was any chance of Donald Trump being prosecuted before the next presidential election for trying to interfere in the previous one, that prospect looks even more dim afterof oral argument at the Supreme Court on Thursday. The conservative justices’ professed concerns over the implications of their rulings for imaginary future presidents, in imaginary future proceedings, seemed more important to them than bringing Trump to justice.
Second, the eventual outcome doesn’t seem likely to offer the kind of decisive rule that would allow special counsel Jack Smith’s criminal prosecution of Trump to proceed to trial quickly. True, a majority might not be willing to fully accept Trump’s audacious claim of absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for his official acts as president. On Thursday, Trump lawyer D. John Sauer reprised his contention that a president could send SEAL Team Six to assassinate a political opponent.
Third, at least some justices appeared interested in a new twist that Trump’s lawyers raised for the first time in their Supreme Court brief: whether the criminal laws under which Trump has been charged can constitutionally be used to prosecute a president if the statutes don’t state explicitly that they apply to the president. Ordinarily, a defendant who fails to bring up a claim in the lower courts is deemed to have waived it, but Justice Brett M.
What was striking — and disconcerting — in Thursday’s arguments was the degree to which the conservative justices seemed willing to prioritize presidential flexibility over presidential accountability, although whether they were seeking to protect Trump or were moved by solicitude for executive power is impossible to know.
United Kingdom Latest News, United Kingdom Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Supreme Court Justices Can Barely Hear Oral Arguments Over Upstairs Neighbor’s Loud MusicWASHINGTON—Straining to make out the plaintiff’s response to their queries as the pounding house beat sent plaster falling from the chamber’s ceiling, the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court reported Friday that they could barely hear oral arguments in the case of Becerra v.
Read more »
Special counsel files brief urging Supreme Court to reject Trump's immunity claim in new filingThe justices will hear oral arguments in the case later this month.
Read more »
Trump's Argument Would Mean Disqualifying Supreme Court Justices: AttorneyFormer president's bid to recuse Judge Juan Merchan in hush money case could apply to any judge in America,' says lawyer.
Read more »
Supreme Court Justices May Do Trump and Jan. 6 Rioters a SolidThe Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Tuesday regarding a case that could vacate hundreds of Jan. 6 obstruction charges.
Read more »
Supreme Court Justices’ Pro-Trump Immunity Arguments Make Zero SenseSome justices seemed more concerned with what imagined future presidents might do to stay in office, rather than holding Trump accountable for how he attempted to do the same.
Read more »
Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump to help with Donald Trump's presidential transition teamFormer President Donald Trump's two eldest sons are set to play key roles in a second Trump administration if their father wins the White House in November.
Read more »