|
Tom Nichols@radiofreetom.bsky.social |
Talk me off the ledge, @kenwhite.bsky.social
Tell me there was some reason that four Justices think that they have to rule on whether the president is a king
30 replies 34 reposts 192 likes
|
@boblamirande.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Isn’t it 5 judges? Only 4 to hear the case but 5 to continue the stay. Or am I mistaken?
1 replies 1 reposts 1 likes
|
Noah
@ncallaway.bsky.social
[ View ] |
They're not going to give him immunity, but they have plenty of cover to take the case, take their time deciding that he doesn't have immunity, and issuing a ruling in June. That will kill any chance for a trial before the election, while garnering "SCOTUS denies Trump immunity claims"
1 replies 4 reposts 21 likes
|
|
willtong.bsky.social
@willtong.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Because SCOTUS is rigged. A majority will vote to grant him immunity. Just watch.
1 replies 0 reposts 3 likes
|
Maddie M
@maddiemm.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Here's what baffles me, isn't Trump basically on the record saying he's going to ignore the Court in his second term? Why do they want to neuter themselves?
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Wergle.bsky.social
@wergle.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Our corrupt SCOTUS has decided that Trump is above the law and the constitution because white straight Christian males in red states can vote him out if they want to.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Susanne Allen
@evensong.bsky.social
[ View ] |
They are delaying for the self pardon.
1 replies 0 reposts 3 likes
|
Ric Steinberger
@ricst.bsky.social
[ View ] |
The six MAGA Justices put a large thumb on the scale for Trump. Is that enough to get him back in the White House? Impossible to say, but it's surely greased the skids for him.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Reply Guy
@elandobbs.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Article 52 of New York’s Civil Practice Law and Rules (“Enforcement of Money Judgment”) will save us.
1 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
David Bailey
@drgdave.bsky.social
[ View ] |
IANAL, but it seems pretty clear to me that they took the case just to help Trump run out the clock until the election. I have yet to see any more persuasive explanation.
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
John Crossley
@jcc72.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I mean, they HAVE TO hear this case. It doesn't help the prosecution timing but there's really no way that the Supremes can punt an issue that might get a former president thrown in jail. Especially in light of the fact that there might be a circuit split coming (documents case).
1 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Christopher D. Brown Ph.D.
@cdbrow1.bsky.social
[ View ] |
It's like a bunt in baseball. It sucks. Everybody hates it. But it is sometimes the only way to win the game.
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
That’s Too Much, Colby
@thatstoomuchcolby.bsky.social
[ View ] |
2-3 think he should be a king; 1-2 (at least) just think SCOTUS should get the final say on everything.
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
RonK, Seattle
@cogenteur.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Biden: "Good news! I've got Seal Team Six on hot standby."
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
Matt Waters
@mwwaters.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I’m just a civilian non-lawyer, but I’ve got a difficult time understanding how this argument wasn’t sanctionable to begin with. It’s even less understandable how 4 justices felt some need to clarify something SC already stated 9-0 in Nixon case.
0 replies 0 reposts 3 likes
|
Auntie G
@auntieg.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Because Thomas (75) & Alito (73) want to retire, and so long as a Democrat is in the White House they can't. These "impartial" so-called justices are so committed to the GOP's vice-grip on the judiciary that they'll embrace transparent corruption to put Donald Trump back in the White House.
0 replies 0 reposts 3 likes
|
Dag.
@3fecta.bsky.social
[ View ] |
It is delay. They are trying to prevent pre-election conviction. It's cynical and evil...unless.
0 replies 0 reposts 4 likes
|
Frying Pan
@bluemirrah.bsky.social
[ View ] |
My most hopeful take is they want lay to rest the question of immunity by having the SC clearly state the president does not get blanket immunity. If they don't render a decision it leaves it open for the many bad actors to fill with nonsense.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Ankylodad
@ankylodad.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Astonishingly corrupt
0 replies 0 reposts 2 likes
|
Peter Hurley
@phrly.bsky.social
[ View ] |
There could be 2 (probably including Roberts who has a fetish for this stuff) who believe that putting Trump behind bars before the Supreme Court has signed off would lead to a legitimacy crisis for the courts. Then Alito and Thomas who are nuts.
0 replies 1 reposts 8 likes
|
Warhammerchick
@celticdragon1.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Because they do what their billionaire masters bought them to do.
0 replies 0 reposts 2 likes
|
Rob Liguori
@robxlii.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I'm not Ken, but I am an attorney and fellow ledge-sitter, and actually I think pwnallthethings is probably right. Delay the trial -- though that's not necessarily assured -- and come down in favor of no immunity in the meantime. Win-lose? Lose-lose? Who fucking knows.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
|
Fat Kid Heavy Industries.
@hailthefatkid.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I just hope not to limp away from this existential threat.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
JoyComethInTheMorning
@sheadapts.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Waiting to see whether he can 'off' other judges or certain prosecutors in that time? Terroristtrump
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Taul Apreides
@nookum.bsky.social
[ View ] |
It gets 7 mpg, sleeps 6, and lets you overnight in a Walmart lot like it’s a Hilton.
0 replies 0 reposts 3 likes
|
Orla McCool
@orlamccool.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Judge Luttig on Deadline White House - Trump has "tested our democracy to the breaking point..."
0 replies 0 reposts 3 likes
|
|
Orla McCool
@orlamccool.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Talk us ALL off the ledge.
0 replies 0 reposts 3 likes
|
Two all the way, a coffee milk, and a Del's
@ri.oldfolkshome.org
[ View ] |
If they wanted to hear the case for sincere reasons why didn’t they just take the appeal when Smith tried to bring it right to them from the district court? Likewise, why such a slow schedule (April??). It stinks to high heaven.
1 replies 7 reposts 55 likes
|
|
@readeradrift.bsky.social
[ View ] |
There's a reason the supreme court has lost the confidence of the nation
0 replies 0 reposts 4 likes
|
Tony Somogyi 🟢 🇺🇦
@tonysomo.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Reason # 1 - Leonard Leo; ditto for every reason thereafter.
0 replies 0 reposts 9 likes
|
Richard P Clark
@zippyrich.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Ben Wittes over at Lawfare thought it would go this way only because the case is important enough historically that SCOTUS wouldn’t want the DC Circuit to have the final say. They’ll conclude POTUS isn’t above the law and want to make sure it’s SCOTUS codifying it. Still bogus as hell.
1 replies 0 reposts 2 likes