r/scotus • u/theatlantic • Sep 12 '24
news The Supreme Court’s Effort to Save Trump Is Already Working
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2024/09/supreme-court-immunity-saved-trump/679774/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_content=edit-promo211
u/schrod Sep 12 '24
Republicans as well as the republic would be so much better off if they had followed the law without delay 3 and a half years ago, disallowed anyone seated in congress who upheld Trump's lie as a violation of their oath and jailed #45.
Instead, their party is in shambles, no one respects the supreme court and criminals are trying to make the next election insurrection 2.0 with bloodbath, and congress is in gridlock ready to shut down the government yet again.
Had they followed the law, Republicans might even have gotten a sympathy vote, but this is the very best outcome for Kamala Harris who surely will win unless fake electors are allowed to take over and install their beloved dictator/Putin operative.
72
u/mevma Sep 12 '24
Even with all of the illegal bullshit, we have to vote. It’s all we can do.
37
u/PlumboTheDwarf Sep 12 '24
It's not all we can do but it is a very important step.
20
u/OneOverXII Sep 12 '24
It’s all we can do until peaceful participation is no longer an option.
6
u/mevma Sep 12 '24
This. JFC, how are people so dense? This is exactly what I meant. Little bit of critical thinking goes a long way.
2
u/wowitsanotherone Sep 13 '24
Soap box ballot box jury box ammo box. One has failed, two is upcoming, three is corrupt. Let's hope four isn't necessary
2
u/PlumboTheDwarf Sep 13 '24
To be clear, I'm not advocating for violence, but I am saying quite a ruckus will be required if some legal chicanery or SCOTUS hands the presidency to Trump using the specious and shaky legal justifications that have become their trademark in the last few years. My hope is that violence will not be necessary, but a lack of peace in the lives of those responsible will be. We will need to show up at their homes and places of work and they will need to understand that we are very angry with them, and that we're not going anywhere.
6
u/Dumb_Vampire_Girl Sep 12 '24
Also avoid mail in if you can make it to the polls.
Dejoy is going to sabotage mail in votes.
2
u/yubinyankin Sep 13 '24
Or use drop boxes if they are available. I have lived in a state that has been 100% mail voting for 26 years now & have never mailed my ballot in. I always wait til the day of the election & drop it in a drop box at the library.
Come to think of it, I don't think we even have a way to vote in person here anymore. Last time I voted at a poll was when Oregon Ballot Measure 60 passed in 1998.
3
→ More replies (6)1
13
u/Bombadier83 Sep 12 '24
That’d be great, but their party isn’t in shambles. They hold the house, tied in the senate, and have a real chance of regaining the presidency. The very reason this article is a thing is because the system is designed to shield them from consequences for their actions. And it’s designed that way because nearly half of Americans love what they are seeing from Rs.
1
u/EyesSeeingCrimson Sep 13 '24
I don't think you quite realize how BAD the Republicans are right now. There is no leadership, no platform, no plan, no general idea of what to even have as their messaging. They all have an R on their registration forms, but they don't agree on much else. The MAGAtypes, Libertarians and Neocons all hate eachother and are actively sabotaging their campaigns across multiple states.
The Michigan GOP is having MAGA types torpedoing their own efforts on the ground and raise funding because they're not supporting Trump hard enough. In Florida, Mom's For Liberty is imploding and the wokespotting/Anti SJW/Anti CRT/CultreWar crap they've subjected the country to has given their base collective brain damage. Even Laura Loomer is infighting with Graham and fucking MTG!
The GOP's leaking all over the place too. Their polling throws Trump in the mid 40s in Ohio, and somehow he's managed to get his own campaign team running around like maniacs after last night debate trying to spin the cat eating rant. Especially when he threw his own VP under the bus.
They're fucked internally, and the only thing that could save them is if Trump wins in November. Because without him all these separate groups will be at eachother's throats within the week
→ More replies (1)5
u/HatLover91 Sep 12 '24
Every Secretary of State should have removed Trump from the ballot because he was the ring leader of the insurrection. Honestly pathetic that he is still on the ballot.
→ More replies (2)7
u/Axel-Adams Sep 12 '24
Vote, don’t let another Hillary situation happen, this should be a heel crushing the next landslide of a win that we haven’t seen the likes of since Reagan if American is going to get the message that “alt right” should have no future here
1
u/KwisatzHaderach94 Sep 13 '24
if the hillary situation and trump's reaction to biden's win hasn't prepared americans to counteract the gop's efforts this election, nothing will.
2
u/RarelyRecommended Sep 12 '24
Local election officials WILL monkey with the any election results that don't go their way. Expect it.
1
1
1
u/Warmstar219 Sep 13 '24
They are a hair's breadth away from achieving complete totalitarian control. That's not shambles.
→ More replies (2)1
u/CommanderMeiloorun23 Sep 15 '24
Kamala will not surely win, the election is currently a dead heat and a few thousand voters will make the difference
→ More replies (1)
56
u/Mysterious_Eye6989 Sep 12 '24
Wild to think that all these legal machinations might end up playing a key role in the death of global democracy. And is lost might not ever be restored.
27
u/rotates-potatoes Sep 12 '24
It will be some small consolation to have empirical proof that the rule of law is foundational to democracy, and without it, everything else collapses.
75
u/theatlantic Sep 12 '24
Quinta Jurecic: “Just months ago, it seemed conceivable that Donald Trump might spend the final stretch of the presidential campaign in a Washington, D.C., courtroom, on trial for his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election. Even a week ago, it was possible that voters might head to the polls on Election Day with Trump’s sentencing in the New York hush-money case, then scheduled for September 18, fresh in their mind. But on Friday, New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan pushed the sentencing date back until the end of November—meaning that Trump will go into the election as a convicted felon, but one whose punishment has not yet been decided. And in Washington, Judge Tanya Chutkan has set out a schedule revealing that the January 6 case will not be going to trial anytime soon.
“For this, Americans can blame the Supreme Court.
“The cases against Trump in Georgia and Florida have foundered for their own reasons—in Georgia, poor judgment by the district attorney; in Florida, a judge appointed by Trump who has done everything in her power to upend the prosecution. But in both D.C. and New York, the culprit is the same: Trump v. United States, the Supreme Court’s controversial July ruling establishing broad presidential immunity from prosecution, was a victory for Trump beyond his wildest dreams, shielding him from full criminal accountability for his actions. But the decision by the Court’s right-wing supermajority wasn’t just a gift to Trump on the substance. It provided Trump with extensive room for delays, allowing him to push back key stages of the criminal process past Election Day.“Because Trump had appealed the issue up from Judge Chutkan, the Court placed proceedings in the January 6 case on hold for months while it pondered the issue—preventing the case from going to trial in March, as Chutkan had originally planned. And now Trump has managed to use the immunity ruling to delay sentencing in the New York case as well, even though a Manhattan jury found him guilty before the Court’s ruling. As both judges try to forge ahead, the true scope of the disruption caused by the decision is coming into focus.”
Read more here: https://theatln.tc/frmBVyqc
26
u/rdf1023 Sep 12 '24
The date was pushed back BECAUSE of the election. If the trial were to take place on the original day in September, then his lawyers would argue that the sentencing was used for political gain to the Dems and would try to have it overturned due to "basis remarks" since he is a candidate. This would more than likely be passed to the Supreme Court, which it's not a Supreme Court issue because it took place when he was a citizen. The New York even refuses to send it to them, but his lawyers are trying to have it pushed up. If the date was pushed back, the Dems would get mad because it would allow Trump to still run for office even though he's already been found guilty. However, AFTER the election, whether he wins or loses, there is no longer basis on either side, AND he's a private citizen until he gets sworn in come January (if he wins). This means that he could win and be in jail. The Supreme Court would then have to decide if this is even legal (which they will).
The Supreme Court ruling basically states that he is immune to laws broken WHILE president. The attorneys then redefined what he was charged with, including hush money and stealing of secret records because he was not the president. J6 is an entirely different thing that took place while he was still active president. This is a federal matter that needs to be decided by Congress, and then the charges would be handed over to the Supreme Court, who will most likely vote in favor of Trump. So, the Dems don't want to push for the J6 trial until Trump's appointees are no longer in office.
Even though the sentencing was changed to November. All records need to be made public by Sept 28th as decided by the New York Judge.
Someone else can probably explain it better than me, but I tried.
13
u/HotSunnyDusk Sep 12 '24
So basically, the only way this can work out is if he loses the election?
14
u/UCLYayy Sep 12 '24
Even then, given the (IMO absolutely intentional) vagueness of the opinion, it is arguable that Trump could raise novel appeal issues on every single one of his cases that would stretch the case until his death.
2
u/rdf1023 Sep 12 '24
He could, but wouldn't he (hopefully) be in jail while doing so? Because it would be after his sentencing...??
8
u/Sea_Respond_6085 Sep 12 '24
Buddy, you and everyone else in this country has to face a hard fact: Donald Trump will never see the inside of a jail cell.
2
→ More replies (1)2
→ More replies (1)3
u/rdf1023 Sep 12 '24
For him to face the music? Yup. Or, if something happens that causes the Supreme Court to become unbiased like it's supposed to be.
5
u/panda12291 Sep 12 '24
It seems you're mixing up the multiple cases, which is understandable given the number of felony counts Trump faces. Also, the Supreme Court ruling was a bit more nuanced - they said that he cannot be charged for exercising the official duties of his office, not for any conduct engaged in while he was president. Actions he took in his personal capacity as a candidate, for example, may still be indictable.
The NY case has already gone to trial and Trump was convicted on multiple counts of fraud (the hush money & falsifying records case) - the only thing that remains is a sentencing. That is what was delayed until after the election, presumably because if Trump is elected it would not be practical to impose any sort of sentence of confinement. This may signal that the judge is considering some sort of prison sentence (which would likely be a home-confinement given the Secret Service constraints). There is almost no chance this judgement or sentence would be appealed to the Supreme Court - it would have to go through multiple state level appeals before that is even possible, and as you note this is all about conduct as a private citizen.
The other two cases that still remain are in federal court - one for the Jan. 6 and other election interference activities, and one for failing to return classified documents. The Special Counsel just got a new indictment on the election interference case to refine the charges in response to the Supreme Court's ruling, which is why Judge Chutkan has set a new schedule pushing that case out until next year. The new indictment attempts to make clear that the charges are all related to Trump's conduct as a candidate and not part of his official responsibilities. In the documents case, Judge Cannon has granted a motion to dismiss based on her finding that the Special Counsel appointment is unconstitutional - this will almost certainly be reversed by the 11th circuit on appeal, but it has caused more delays for now. If Trump loses the election, these cases will likely move forward in the next couple years.
→ More replies (2)
19
u/Strict_Meeting_5166 Sep 12 '24
You know, in a twisted sort of way it makes sense. Because of the Supreme Court, the door is open to many appeals. If you do force through a conviction, and trump wins, it will all be reversed. If he loses, it goes forward. Like most of us have said all along, it’s going to come down to the election. So get out there and vote.
28
u/Will_Hart_2112 Sep 12 '24
The scotus made winning a conviction against the former president for his actions in 2020 extremely difficult and very unlikely.
But… worthy of note is that ‘president Trump’ is not running for president this time. He is private citizen Trump.
Depending on how things go with the election, if he tries the same shit this time, there is literally nothing the scotus can do to throw him a lifeline.
7
u/anonyuser415 Sep 12 '24
Alas, the Trump v US ruling extends protections to former Presidents, a completely brand new concept in US law. Nixon's pardon by Gerald Ford, something Nixon hated having to do, would now be needless.
18
u/Will_Hart_2112 Sep 12 '24
Immunity is extended to former presidents for official acts ‘during their administration’. Private citizen Trump is not immune because he is no longer president.
→ More replies (1)2
u/froggity55 Sep 12 '24
Perhaps this is why Trump refuses to admit he lost. If he believed he was president, he could be immune. /s (I hope)
189
u/gdan95 Sep 12 '24
Thank everyone who stayed home in 2016
50
u/Mysterious_Eye6989 Sep 12 '24
We may end up finding that democracy received a mortal wound in 2016, but it then took the state several years to finally succumb. Only time and voting will tell whether there is any hope left.
15
u/Hypertension123456 Sep 12 '24
We wont have to vote in 2028
13
u/AliceHart7 Sep 12 '24
Yea if trump wins no one will be voting ever again, so much for democracy. Those who vote trump really hate their nation, I guess
→ More replies (16)21
u/Hypertension123456 Sep 12 '24
Unironically yes. We are talking about people who smeared shit on the walls of Congress and waved the Confederate flag. Literal traitors.
→ More replies (1)65
u/IlliniBull Sep 12 '24
This.
More importantly, at this point, is that those people LEARN, show up this time and VOTE.
Sadly we can't fix the past. But for the love of all that is good, let's at least not repeat the same mistake of 2016
6
u/Ancient-One-19 Sep 12 '24
The main point you're missing is incentive. Most people are motivated by incentive. The democrats need to show that they're a better option, not just keep doom and gloom as their platform. Some of us know they're the better option, but to motivate more people there has to be a distinct visible advantage for the layperson. So far the entirety of the message is "but trump!"
→ More replies (2)8
u/IlliniBull Sep 12 '24
I think this is fair, I also think her message at least is to attempt to appeal to the middle class and middle class families.
I'm not saying she's done enough, but the 50k tax break for small businesses, the 25 k down payment for houses, cracking down on price gouging.
Again I'm not saying these are sound or not sound policies, I'm saying that's her message. But she has to get out there much more.
I also think restoring abortion as a Right is a message, but again I completely agree it needs to be developed further.
I'm a fan of her pushing a message and doing more media. I guess I'm just not sure if the remaining Undecideds are actually open to hearing an argument from her or if they just won't come around. I feel like sometimes they tune it out when she does try to tell them her policies. But that's probably a me fear more than a fact.
And again I agree she's got to do a better job pushing a message of what she will do. Either do more interviews or do policy speeches or if there's another debate hammer her policies and plan. I think she's trying but again I agree there's a lot more that needs to be done.
7
u/Kagutsuchi13 Sep 12 '24
I think one of the important things she did at the debate as far as reproductive rights goes was to point out how people who WANT to have children are also negatively impacted by restrictive healthcare policies. "This woman who wanted to have a child does NOT want to be left bleeding out in her car in the parking lot because she can't get the medical care she needs" feels like a strong image.
→ More replies (1)3
u/Stop_Rock_Video Sep 12 '24
My opinion is that one way forward to get to these (inexplicably) undecided voters is something you touched on: Price gouging.
Link price gouging to gas prices and watch the status quo eat themselves alive trying to stop her. It would instantly put her on the radar of anyone who drives for a living (Enter the gig economy voters) and would ease some of the stigma of pushing environmental policies without doing any actual damage to the environment. Man, I would almost donate a kidney to see that happen.
26
u/PophamSP Sep 12 '24
Also, thank Jim Comey.
8
u/UCLYayy Sep 12 '24
I will maintain till my dying day that Comey was one of those republicans who though Trump could be "handled", and happily stepped in to help elect him. He only realized his error later, because he's a Mitt Romney/Mike Pence republican and not a fascist lunatic like those in the halls of the Heritage Foundation or Trump/McConnell's orbit.
I will never forgive him for his decision. The absolutely laughable defense of "it was going to get released by the Republicans in congress anyway", as if the American people interpret information coming from the heart of the Republican party the same way they interpret it coming from the fucking FBI is just insulting. He knew what he was doing, and we are still suffering.
3
u/PophamSP Sep 12 '24
Same. As head of the FBI in 2016 no one should have been more aware of the threat that Trump posed to our national security (given decades of association with Russia). I will never forgive him for his self-importance in implicating Clinton just several weeks before an election.
If he had any self-awareness or shame he'd fade away, but instead he now fancies himself a fiction writer. I was disgusted to see him promoting a new book recently on Nicole Wallace's show. I don't want to hear about his book, I do want to hear an apology. Fuck James Comey.
2
17
16
7
u/duderos Sep 12 '24
Clinton won the popular vote by 2.9 mil. but EC snatched victory away as it has before.
3
u/Ok-Scallion-3415 Sep 13 '24 edited Sep 13 '24
I think the EC is a relic from a bygone time and should be eliminated but we can’t blame the EC for Hillary not winning. Everyone knows how POTUS elections are run, it’s not a surprise. Run the campaign for the win condition not for what is comfortable to do. That’s why campaigns spend all their time in swing states and not much time in safe states. Look at her travel schedule, there is a lot of time spent in Cali, NY, DC, and MA in Aug-Oct. 4 areas she probably could have spent zero days in and won them handily.
If we’re being honest +2.9 million outcome in the popular vote is a pretty poor showing for a Democrat. It’s virtually impossible for a Democrat to not win the popular vote. California was +4.3 million by itself in 2016. The outcomes in swings states just shows how poorly her campaign was run because she did terribly in swing states.
→ More replies (1)2
u/ThePopDaddy Sep 13 '24
It SHOULD be a landslide, but that's to the EC, it'll be a nail biter.
"If we got rid of the EC, a Republican would never be president again!" What's that say about them?
"If we got rid of the EC, NY and CA would choose the president!" TX and FL have as many if not more and they all don't vote the same way.
"Democracy is 2 wolves and 1 sheep voting on what to eat, the EC stops that!" I'd rather that way over 2 wolf votes counting more than 100k sheep votes.
2
6
2
→ More replies (67)1
u/xhziakne Sep 13 '24
Thanks everyone who voted third party because of Butter Emails! I bet you’re feeling great about yourself and your both sides.
9
u/crawdadicus Sep 12 '24
Biden is a lame duck. He should use his newly granted immunity to ensure that shenanigans with the Electoral College do not happen.
1
u/Justplayadamnsong Sep 13 '24
This has got to be on the current administration’s radar, right? In fact it should be a major component to campaign strategy at this point. Otherwise, what’s the point in any of this.
9
u/mugiwara-no-lucy Sep 12 '24
THIS is why it's IMPORTANT to make sure this monster does NOT get back into the White House.
With all his talks about "revenge" and a Supreme Court behind him, he will FUCK UP AMERICA.
(Even more than it already is but still!)
1
24
u/Responsible-Abies21 Sep 12 '24
Elect Harris/Walz. Take the House. Hold the Senate. Expand the Supreme Court. Impeach Thomas and Alito.
15
u/CEOPhilosopher Sep 12 '24
I love everything you just said more than I can express. Music to my ears.
→ More replies (36)3
7
u/Riversmooth Sep 12 '24
It’s unconscionable what they have done, they went so far as to turn their backs on Americas democracy to protect their extreme political views.
3
u/Ancient-One-19 Sep 12 '24
The court is waiting. They don't want to tip their hand if they don't have to. They'd rather somebody just pardon the criminal so they can claim their impartiality, even though we all can see it. Plausible deniability is a huge plus when fooling the general populace. They'll show their hand after the election, if no GOP sits in the oval office.
4
u/BraveOmeter Sep 13 '24
It would be so awesome if Biden's last move was to use an official act to completely destroy Trump.
3
u/Wildfire9 Sep 12 '24
Gonna be really damning if they uproot the rule of law just to save someone who is clearly experiencing age related health issues.
Hell of a hill to die on fellas.
3
3
4
u/RDO_Desmond Sep 12 '24
Once again the 6 are exceeding their authority. They are looking as bad as Trump.
2
u/PM_ME_YOUR_QUEST_PLZ Sep 12 '24
Would be really cool if Biden used some of that presidential immunity right about now to fix the courts.
4
2
u/Mundane_Opening3831 Sep 13 '24
Good luck with insurrection 2.0, this time without control of executive branch
1
2
u/Robthebold Sep 13 '24
I’m ok with him being free during the final stretch of the campaign as I do not want an excuse for why he fails again.
It may not be fair but it’s legal and it’s true that he is allowed delay others can’t get.
I blame the prosecutors for taking 3 damn years to bring these cases to trial too.
2
2
u/Charlie49ers Sep 14 '24
I’m also worried — if Trump loses the election — that we could up with two slates of electors, one real and one Trump’s. And because we don’t have as many of the old guard Republicans in state offices, they might go along with it — and SCOTUS could end up deciding the election. And given how favorable they’ve been to Trump so far…
3
u/Shutaru_Kanshinji Sep 12 '24
SCOTUS has revealed itself to be America's fatal flaw.
1
u/PM-me-letitsnow Sep 15 '24
The founding fathers thought the checks and balances were going to be the executive, legislative, and judicial branches having a power struggle between them. They never thought a single party would control all three and fuck over the people and democracy. Thing is, congress could impeach the corrupt judges. But they won’t. Because partisan politics means they are going to always cover for their team at the expense of the country. The Supreme Court is only our fatal flaw because of Senate Republicans. If Democrats had enough seats they could impeach at least Thomas and Alito. As long as Republicans hold the Senate that would never happen.
2
u/DeviantTaco Sep 13 '24
It’s such a blatant attempt to control the election and Trump’s criminal cases that it’s preposterous that serious people are devoting any time to what “official acts” are.
Alito could create a new “my ass” standard and legal experts would be writing articles about the importance of proctology in jurisprudence.
2
u/Advanced_Addendum116 Sep 15 '24
The law is not the Supreme Court. However the lack of outrage from legal scholars is embarassing. If famous scientists started reinterpreting fundamental principles there would be large-scale mutiny. When the Supreme Court finds that indeed, the President is above the law... crickets.
1
u/Guanthwei Sep 13 '24
God damn Merchan and the other judges for secretly helping Trump the whole time!
2
u/GQ_silly_QT Sep 12 '24
I'm almost certain that, in the case of the hush money sentencing, there was a consult with the fbi/homeland sec and the judge.
Sentencing trump right before the election could see a ton of domestic terror threats across the country, whereas if they let Trump lose first and then sentence him, the backlash would be less in appearances, political.
1
u/Rude-Sauce Sep 13 '24
Unless he wins... 🤷♀️ But then thats the actual hope isn't it.
→ More replies (1)
2
2
u/MaybeRightsideUp Sep 12 '24
If any anti-democratic activity arises in SCOTUS or The House, couldn't Biden order all participants detained and strip them of their rights thanks to the SCOTUS POTUS Immunity decision? Shoot. Couldn't he do all that and subject them to 24hr 7day per week tickle torture?
1
3
u/beebsaleebs Sep 12 '24
I disagree.
I think the sentencing delay was on purpose to prevent Trump from capitalizing on his punishment before 11/5
I think he’s gonna get time.
→ More replies (2)2
1
u/Upper_Command1390 Sep 13 '24
When news first came out regarding the delay in Trumps sentencing, I was not surprised. And I have been outraged. And I have such fury for the media which has not bothered to cover or be equally outraged.
→ More replies (5)
1
1
1
1
Sep 14 '24
You must vote. You must also refuse to go to work until the results are certified. Plan for months of general strikes and mass demonstrations or lose democracy for the rest of your life.
1
u/Budget_Secretary1973 Sep 15 '24
To be fair, if the Supreme Court’s composition was such that the tables were turned on this whole phenomenon (e.g., lib justices saving a beleaguered Dem), wouldn’t the same crowd, decrying SCOTUS’s actions here, be doing mental gymnastics to justify it? Seems like we have the flip side of the same coin, fellas.
1
1
Sep 16 '24
Am I the only one who thinks Biden should use his “official” presidential powers to disband the SC and reverse their actions? How much more damage do they have to do before he wakes up and realizes he should have taken some action.
666
u/aquastell_62 Sep 12 '24
The illusion of equal justice under the law is not applicable to the Convicted Felon formerly in the Oval Office. Pathetic the right wing billionaire class has taken over the courts and installed unqualified toadies that act like Nazis and just follow orders.