That may very well be. But that’s how the rule of law works,
by domerfromkansas (2024-02-28 21:39:25)

In reply to: With no trial  posted by vermin05

Cannot Reply Return to Political

And we should be grateful for the process. Respectfully, I don’t think it’s right to think of this as a win for trump. The issues are so important that SCOTUS needs to decide them, for the good of our democracy. The rule of law will prevail and the system will continue to work. It’s not a good idea to keep him off the ballot or make him a martyr with a conviction on a novel legal question. Trust the voters.

Denying cert also complies with the rule of law.
by John@Indy  (2024-02-29 08:48:47)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

Trump's argument is frivolous, and would have been considered laughable at any time before he asserted it. It certainly would have been news to Gerald Ford, who blew up his re-election campaign before it began by pardoning Nixon, or to Bill Clinton, who surrendered his law license on his last day in office as part of a deal to avoid indictment for perjury and obstruction of justice.

If the issues are obviously "so important that SCOTUS needs to decide them," simply because a former president is involved, and there was no circumstance in which SCOTUS would decline to hear the case, then they should have taken it when Smith requested it in December.

I saw a clip of Judge Lutig last night where he basially
by wpkirish  (2024-02-29 09:18:35)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

said this. Said the decision by the DC Circuit was sound reasoning and the Court did not "need" to take the case. If the idea is they need to have this settled before the trial they should be expediting the case to allow for the trial to still take place.

Cert is more proper now than it was in December.
by airborneirish  (2024-02-29 15:13:54)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

There was not a final ruling in any court in December and and an appellate court was hearing the same issue. Furthermore, it is a bit odd for the non asserting party to request cert on a defense. Standing comes to mind.

And you keep saying the court is not expediting this. Did you read the order? SEems pretty damned expedited. Writing those briefs is going to burn some hours and coffee.
Coffee sucks *
by ACross  (2024-03-02 15:52:58)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

Considering they just briefed and argued the issue at the
by wpkirish  (2024-02-29 15:24:31)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

DC Circuit the briefs should be pretty well in order without much additional work. I guess there could be some slight changes to the arguments based upon the Appellate Court decision but cant imagine it will change their argument that much.

I guess it somewhat depends on how long they take to rule. With obvious caveat that I expect them to affirm the appelate court it might not be as bad if they rule quickly and the trial can still take place.

Even npr states there ought to be ample time
by airborneirish  (2024-02-29 17:16:34)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

For the trial after this side show is over. It is necessary to hear this. Trump may lose and one day we have a crazier sob in charge. Or trump may win and avoid prosecution. Either way I’m ok with how this has played out. It has all gone down fairly promptly following the case history. If smith got cert granted in December I think that would have played into trumps hands: “look they have evem corrupted the Supreme Court. Why is smith trying to avoid the appellate court. Blah blah blah”

He’ll lose. He’ll probably just run to Russia.

I am not saying i disagree and I am not of the mind set the
by wpkirish  (2024-02-29 17:57:45)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

Court did this to help him. There is a case to be made that a well reasoned decision by the Appellate Court is sufficient in most cases so that without a conflict in the circuits the case should be left alone. Obviously they may feel this is an important enough case the Court needs to weigh in.

It is all fine if they rule quickly after the hearing. The stay prohibits anything from being done inthe meantime so if he loses it will take some time to get back up tp speed. I think the prior indications were 4-6 weeks for the prosecution after Jury selection. Of course it will be over the summer so there will always be the I have a family vacations scheduled issue to deal with.

I think DOJ has a rule about political trials / announcements of politicians around elections. I dont remember exaclty what it is but 90 days sticks in my mind. Even assuming it is 60 days that is the beginning of September which means to try the case before the election the Court likely needs to issue a decision by the miiddle of May at the latest. That assumes a month to get the case ready and 2.5 months to pick a jury and try the case.

The time frame is tight but not impossible. Honestly Haley and any Republicans who throught a conviction would doom Trump's campaging should probably be more upset.

I see this as a calculated decision
by airborneirish  (2024-02-29 19:08:02)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

There is a non negligible chance that Trump regains the Presidency. If he does, he might blather on about his supposed immunity because "the supreme court, that supreme law of the land, holds our nation together folks. Very good justices. I appointed three of them you know... they didn't rule. That court in the Swamp... they ruled.. unjustly I might add... you know my wife..."

By granting cert and ruling they will take that risk off the table. Then the buffoon will go to trial and he will likely abscond. Fin.
If he regains the presidency, he will pardon himself.
by NDBass  (2024-02-29 21:28:22)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

Then there will another case for the Supreme Court to hear.
From your lips to God's ears *
by wpkirish  (2024-02-29 19:25:26)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

Trusting the voters got us here
by gozer  (2024-02-29 08:18:06)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

Frankly, I think we should lean into the "freedom" side of our ideals a bit more, and we could use a little less "democracy"
Which is how Trump wins *
by El Kabong  (2024-02-29 10:16:52)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

Could be. I pissed into the wind in our primary a few days
by gozer  (2024-02-29 10:59:15)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

ago, for what good it did.

Maybe we'll get lucky and he celebrates clinching the nomination by getting 24 hookers and has a heart attack and dies trying to impress them with his cocksmanship, and a sense of normalcy can start to return.

Seems about the only way out at this point.