General Discussion

markpkessinger

(8,401 posts) Thu Apr 25, 2024, 11:21 AM Apr 25

My prediction on the immunity claim

Last edited Thu Apr 25, 2024, 12:23 PM - Edit history (1)

Based on just a few minutes of listening to the oral arguments in Trump’s immunity case, i think I can predict where the right wing justices will come down. I believe they will rule that a president does not enjoy absolute immunity with respect to private acts, however, they will come up with a multi-pronged test for what constitutes a private, aa opposed to an official, act, and will send the case back to Judge Chutkin with instructions to apply that test to the acts in question. Her application of that test will then itself be subject to litigation up through the courts.

In other words, they will rule so as to gum up the prosecutorial works, giving Trump the delay he wants. I hope I am wrong about that, but I don't think I am.

12 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

My prediction on the immunity claim (Original Post) markpkessinger Apr 25 OP

It really sounds like they're looking for a way to carve out Trump from this whole thing and send it back Walleye Apr 25 #1

This is why they refused the case before the appeals court heard it ScratchCat Apr 25 #2

100% 50 Shades Of Blue Apr 25 #3

When you say "public", I think you mean "official" Fiendish Thingy Apr 25 #4

Actually, yes, thank you n/t markpkessinger Apr 25 #6

Sooooo... the SCOTUS will perform a "Catch and Kill" on immunity. FalloutShelter Apr 25 #5

Yep, that was the plan ScratchCat Apr 25 #7

SCOTUS-6(R) are the obstruction mechanism bucolic_frolic Apr 25 #8

Time for President Biden to expand the court. Emile Apr 25 #9

Declare an executive order Blue Owl Apr 25 #11

He's already gotten some immunity with their month's-long delay to hold oral arguments... brush Apr 25 #10

And, I should add. we wouldn't be in this position had not Garland sat on his hands for so long! n/t markpkessinger Apr 25 #12

Walleye

(31,056 posts)

1. It really sounds like they're looking for a way to carve out Trump from this whole thing and send it back

Reply to markpkessinger (Original post)

Thu Apr 25, 2024, 11:23 AM

Apr 25

ScratchCat

(2,002 posts)

2. This is why they refused the case before the appeals court heard it

Reply to markpkessinger (Original post)

Thu Apr 25, 2024, 11:25 AM

Apr 25

So they could drag it out longer.

Otherwise, they take it up first or let the appeals court ruling stand.

They did neither and are now potentially indicating they will send it back

They knew what they were doing from the second they turned down the fast track.

50 Shades Of Blue

(10,048 posts)

3. 100%

Reply to markpkessinger (Original post)

Thu Apr 25, 2024, 11:25 AM

Apr 25

Fiendish Thingy

(15,657 posts)

4. When you say "public", I think you mean "official"

Reply to markpkessinger (Original post)

Thu Apr 25, 2024, 11:26 AM

Apr 25

At least that’s the terminology I have heard used- official acts as president vs. acts as an office seeker.

There are certainly some on the court who would pursue the strategy you have outlined; I guess we will have to wait until June to see if it’s a majority or not.

markpkessinger

(8,401 posts)

6. Actually, yes, thank you n/t

Reply to Fiendish Thingy (Reply #4)

Thu Apr 25, 2024, 11:29 AM

Apr 25

FalloutShelter

(11,879 posts)

5. Sooooo... the SCOTUS will perform a "Catch and Kill" on immunity.

Reply to markpkessinger (Original post)

Thu Apr 25, 2024, 11:29 AM

Apr 25

They will make it impossible for the American People to hear the full account of this Traitor's actions before the election.
How are they any different from David Pecker and the scheme that kept voters from hearing about the Traitor's pre-election crimes?

ScratchCat

(2,002 posts)

7. Yep, that was the plan

Reply to FalloutShelter (Reply #5)

Thu Apr 25, 2024, 11:30 AM

Apr 25

They will make it impossible for the American People to hear the full account of this Traitor's actions before the election.

bucolic_frolic

(43,295 posts)

8. SCOTUS-6(R) are the obstruction mechanism

Reply to markpkessinger (Original post)

Thu Apr 25, 2024, 11:33 AM

Apr 25

An obstruction conspiracy. They sure know immunity when they wear it.

Emile

(22,927 posts)

9. Time for President Biden to expand the court.

Reply to markpkessinger (Original post)

Thu Apr 25, 2024, 11:40 AM

Apr 25

Blue Owl

(50,506 posts)

11. Declare an executive order

Reply to Emile (Reply #9)

Thu Apr 25, 2024, 11:50 AM

Apr 25

brush

(53,871 posts)

10. He's already gotten some immunity with their month's-long delay to hold oral arguments...

Reply to markpkessinger (Original post)

Thu Apr 25, 2024, 11:48 AM

Apr 25

and even more if they come up with a list of public v private acts to send back to Judge Chutkan to apply.

What needs to be done is send it back to Judge Chutkan and take off the hold on her trial from starting while they take their time to rule.

Also they need to specify that presidential duties are within the sphere of official acts but campaign duties are not...but in either case a sitting president or former president is not above the law and can not commit crimes with impunity.

The argument that an executive/president has to have immunity is that of either aristocracy or of an autocracy.

Neither applies to a democracy and the mere notion of one person being above the law should be dismissed out of hand.

markpkessinger

(8,401 posts)

12. And, I should add. we wouldn't be in this position had not Garland sat on his hands for so long! n/t

Reply to markpkessinger (Original post)

Thu Apr 25, 2024, 12:36 PM

Apr 25

Reply to this discussion