- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 7/1/24 at 9:41 am to Indefatigable
quote:quote:
thought the expectation was to get the case remanded back to Chunkin to determine if J6 was an official act under the presidency?
That’s what they did.
So Chunkin (however you spell her name) will say Trump's acts were unoffical...at least that is the expectation.
Then Trump will appeal to the DC circuit, right?
Posted on 7/1/24 at 9:41 am to DarthRebel
quote:
The court in Part III of its opinion indicates that in this case "no court has thus far considered how" to distinguish between official and unofficial acts.
Moreover, Roberts continues, "the lower courts rendered their decisions on a highly expedited basis" and "did not analyze the conduct alleged in the indictment to decide which of it should be categorized as official and which unofficial" -- and it wasn't briefed before the Supreme Court.
This is big.
Signals that the may take up the issue again once thorough analysis of official vs unofficial.
They may eventually institute a "test"
Posted on 7/1/24 at 9:41 am to TrueTiger
In summary:
This goes back to lower courts who will rule that whatever Trump did was in his unofficial role not a constitutional capacity when he was president
Then this will get appealed to the dc court who will uphold it
Then it will get appealed to the scotus and by then the election will be over and functionally all this will be dead anyway
This goes back to lower courts who will rule that whatever Trump did was in his unofficial role not a constitutional capacity when he was president
Then this will get appealed to the dc court who will uphold it
Then it will get appealed to the scotus and by then the election will be over and functionally all this will be dead anyway
Posted on 7/1/24 at 9:43 am to Indefatigable
quote:
Finally, hopefully this shuts that dumb argument down on here too
Thank you for that. Made a separate thread for it
Posted on 7/1/24 at 9:43 am to rt3
quote:
our taxes about to go up to pay all these legal fees
... and employ all of these new agency lawyers.
Posted on 7/1/24 at 9:43 am to CreoleTigerEsq
quote:
As for the dissents," Roberts writes, "they strike a tone of chilling doom that is wholly disproportionate to what the Court actually does today--conclude that immunity extends to official discussions between the President and his Attorney General, and then remand to the lower courts to determine 'in the first instance' whether and to what extent Trump's remaining alleged conduct is entitled to immunity."
this is strong from roberts
Posted on 7/1/24 at 9:43 am to CreoleTigerEsq
Posted on 7/1/24 at 9:44 am to DarthRebel
quote:
Moreover, Roberts continues, "the lower courts rendered their decisions on a highly expedited basis" and "did not analyze the conduct alleged in the indictment to decide which of it should be categorized as official and which unofficial"
Hmm. I wonder why that is?
Posted on 7/1/24 at 9:44 am to tiger1014
quote:
In summary:
This goes back to lower courts who will rule that whatever Trump did was in his unofficial role not a constitutional capacity when he was president
Then this will get appealed to the dc court who will uphold it
Then it will get appealed to the scotus and by then the election will be over and functionally all this will be dead anyway
yeah pretty much... it added another 50 million steps (only slightly exaggerating) to the process
no way that case gets to trial prior to November
Posted on 7/1/24 at 9:45 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:That is about as strong in favor of Trump's position as could be expected.
assess in the first instance whether a prosecution involving Trump’s alleged attempts to influence the Vice President’s oversight of the certification proceeding would pose any dangers of intrusion on the authority and functions of the Executive Branch.
Posted on 7/1/24 at 9:46 am to tiger1014
I just went back and looked.
So, the only 2 charges left after the Fischer case are Defrauding the US and Conspiracy against Rights.
Those are quite a stretch.
Posted on 7/1/24 at 9:46 am to NC_Tigah
Ah shite, from Thomas
quote:
Justice Thomas writes a concurring opinion in which he questions the validity of Jack Smith's appointment as special counsel. "If this unprecedented prosecution is to proceed, it must be conducted by someone authorized to do so by the American people."
Posted on 7/1/24 at 9:46 am to Indefatigable
quote:
Finally, hopefully this shuts that dumb argument down on here too.
... and that dumb arse argument was floated around on here by all of the "baws" who fashion themselves as scholars of Constitutional law, even though they were adding words to the Constitution and making up this "impeachment and conviction in the Senate as a requirement for criminal prosecution" argument.
This post was edited on 7/1/24 at 9:53 am
Posted on 7/1/24 at 9:48 am to CreoleTigerEsq
Fox calls it:
Posted on 7/1/24 at 9:48 am to HailToTheChiz
Posted on 7/1/24 at 9:48 am to geauxtigers87
quote:
this is strong from roberts
This is precisely what me and SlowFlowPro were saying in that thread, but the peanut gallery here fashioned themselves wiser.
This post was edited on 7/1/24 at 9:58 am
Posted on 7/1/24 at 9:49 am to CreoleTigerEsq
quote:
This is precisely what me and SlowFloPro were saying in that thread
Indefatigable, too
Posted on 7/1/24 at 9:50 am to Kjnstkmn
quote:
Kjnstkmn
And that ends this case.
Posted on 7/1/24 at 9:50 am to DarthRebel
Surprising he wrote that considering it is an issue in the Florida federal case.
How may justices does it take to get cert? That is a sign that an interlocutory appeal would be granted if Judge Cannon rules Jack Smith is properly appointed.
How may justices does it take to get cert? That is a sign that an interlocutory appeal would be granted if Judge Cannon rules Jack Smith is properly appointed.
Page 5 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News