Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   “especially a female” 🌴🥥 (trabern@mas.to)'s status on Friday, 26-Apr-2024 04:45:09 JST “especially a female” 🌴🥥

   The SCOTUS argument on immunity just gaveled out. Many hours of arguments.

   #lawfedi #lawprofessor #scotus

   • Embed this notice
     “especially a female” 🌴🥥 (trabern@mas.to)'s status on Friday, 26-Apr-2024 04:45:06 JST “especially a female” 🌴🥥

     in reply to

     4: At least some number of Justices on the right wing will rule that there is some kind of immunity for core Article II functions (veto, pardon, recommendation clauses mentioned) and maybe even further proceedings to excise core functions (Trump dealings with DOJ mentioned) from indictment, but no blanket immunity against the Jan 6 charges.

   • Embed this notice
     “especially a female” 🌴🥥 (trabern@mas.to)'s status on Friday, 26-Apr-2024 04:45:07 JST “especially a female” 🌴🥥

     in reply to

     3: Sotomayor and Jackson both have very high level understanding of the perils of any form of immunity, and the reasons for the distinction between absolute and qualified immunity. And the insight that all 9 Justices also enjoy a broad immunity (and why)

     Bill repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     “especially a female” 🌴🥥 (trabern@mas.to)'s status on Friday, 26-Apr-2024 04:45:08 JST “especially a female” 🌴🥥

     in reply to

     A couple observations:

     1: It is clear there will still be a Jan 6 case against Trump after SCOTUS rules. No possible outcome results in stopping the prosecution altogether.

   • Embed this notice
     “especially a female” 🌴🥥 (trabern@mas.to)'s status on Friday, 26-Apr-2024 04:45:08 JST “especially a female” 🌴🥥

     in reply to

     2: None of the Justices, and especially true of the conservative wing, wanted to talk about the Trump charges. They abruptly interrupted to keep the advocates from going there.

   • Embed this notice
     “especially a female” 🌴🥥 (trabern@mas.to)'s status on Friday, 26-Apr-2024 04:45:37 JST “especially a female” 🌴🥥

     in reply to

     6: Hypo from Justices at start that got thoughtful traction:

     If a President appoints an ambassador (clearly a core Art II function) in return for a million dollar bribe (clearly criminal). Does the prosecutor have to excise the pure presidential authority part (appointment) from charges and trial due to immunity?

   • Embed this notice
     “especially a female” 🌴🥥 (trabern@mas.to)'s status on Friday, 26-Apr-2024 04:45:38 JST “especially a female” 🌴🥥

     in reply to

     5: The case delay may be all Trump accomplished in SCOTUS.

     Bill repeated this.