S.C. Jack Smith Asks the Supreme Court if US Presidents are Immune from Prosecution.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: WingDingLuey
Has The SCOTUS ever ruled on a "hypothetical" before? 🦓

But this isn't a hypothetical case. Donald Trump is clogging up the courts right now.

Blame the 3 Stooges: Biden-Garland-Smith

The Supreme Court says it will take the case...

Special counsel Jack Smith's team has asked the Supreme Court to step in and decide the issue of presidential immunity regarding former President Donald Trump's federal election interference charges.

Hours after Smith filed his request Monday, the court said it would consider the request on an expedited basis.

More at: abcnews.go.com...

It's good to see SCOTUS able to react to important time-sensitive issues in our society!

originally posted by: WingDingLuey

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: WingDingLuey
Has The SCOTUS ever ruled on a "hypothetical" before? 🦓

Yes. They just did, in that case with the would-be wedding website designer, who was worried she might have to take same sex couples, should she start her business. She wanted permission, in advance of starting her business, that she could post a sign saying that she won't do same sex wedding websites.

SCOTUS gave her the win.

But this isn't a hypothetical case. Donald Trump is clogging up the courts right now. He's literally claiming he can't be held accountable for anything he did during office, because he enjoys "absolute immunity".

Kool. What case?

This one. The Bizarre — and Hypothetical — Case That Sparked the Supreme Court's Regressive LGBTQ+ Discrimination Ruling

And Trump hasn't been convicted of anything (yet), so it's hypothetical isn't it. 😀🐒

No, it isn't hypothetical. He on trial right now, defending himself from conviction. The court can't move on because Trump's legal team has appealed the judge's ruling, that he can be tried, and that he doesn't enjoy absolute immunity from prosecution. So, the prosecutor is asking SCOTUS if former President Trump can even be prosecuted, or does he enjoy absolute immunity.

a reply to: WingDingLuey

Motion to expedite consideration of the petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment is granted, and respondent is directed to file a response to the petition on or before 4 p.m. (EST) on Wednesday, December 20, 2023.

Source

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: WingDingLuey

Motion to expedite consideration of the petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment is granted, and respondent is directed to file a response to the petition on or before 4 p.m. (EST) on Wednesday, December 20, 2023.

Source

Thank You.

a reply to: WeMustCare

That's not what they said. They said they will expedite their consideration on whether or not to take the case.

originally posted by: WeMustCare

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: WingDingLuey
Has The SCOTUS ever ruled on a "hypothetical" before? 🦓

But this isn't a hypothetical case. Donald Trump is clogging up the courts right now.

Blame the 3 Stooges: Biden-Garland-Smith

Funny how you do not put any blame at all on the person responsible - loser trump!

a reply to: bruce88

I'm not sure what your purpose here is.

You seem to have an extreme distaste for due process, free speech and conspiracies.

originally posted by: LeXoXeL
So it's okay if you say you want to be a dictator, but it's not okay if you don't say anything about being a dictator? Is it the dictator part you hate or just the fact that it's not your turn?

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: LeXoXeL

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: WeMustCare

I don't think the Supreme Court will touch it, but it begs the question, what is the left so afraid of with Trump?

First former and current campaigning president to "joke" about being a dictator several times and state he would use the military against his political rivals. What's scary about that lol? As long as he is on your side....

The current administration has shown to use the justice system against a political opponent.

Like a dictator, unless he's on your side.

Apparently, to you, it's okay to actually BE a dictator but not say it out loud.

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: DBCowboy

A petition for a writ of certiorari to review a case pending in a United States court of appeals, before judgment is entered in that court, will be granted only upon a showing that the case is of such imperative public importance as to justify deviation from normal appellate practice and to require immediate determination in this Court.

Rule 11. Certiorari to a United States Court of Appeals before Judgment

Smith is following the rules.

*shrugs*

Fair point.

originally posted by: bruce88

originally posted by: WeMustCare

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: WingDingLuey
Has The SCOTUS ever ruled on a "hypothetical" before? 🦓

But this isn't a hypothetical case. Donald Trump is clogging up the courts right now.

Blame the 3 Stooges: Biden-Garland-Smith

Funny how you do not put any blame at all on the person responsible - loser trump!

I take it you don't own a MAGA hat.

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: WeMustCare

That's not what they said. They said they will expedite their consideration on whether or not to take the case.

All the red banners and the pop-up on my cellphone over a nothing burger!

originally posted by: bruce88

originally posted by: WeMustCare

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: WingDingLuey
Has The SCOTUS ever ruled on a "hypothetical" before? 🦓

But this isn't a hypothetical case. Donald Trump is clogging up the courts right now.

Blame the 3 Stooges: Biden-Garland-Smith

Funny how you do not put any blame at all on the person responsible - loser trump!

You mean the HERO of this story, Trump Skywalker? Come on man!

The extraordinary request

Why the need for anything extraordinary?

Win win for Democrats.

The Supreme Court rules in favor of Trump. The Democrats can claim that the Corrupt Supreme Court are protecting the Corrupt Donald Trump and thats why their weak apple sauce case fell apart.... and the icing on the cake is that they get to use the ruling as a reason to try and pack the court.

The Supreme Court rules in favor of the prosecution. The Democrats get to take the wind out of one of Trump's talking points right before an election. It won't matter when they loose their weak apple sauce case outright or on appeal; Their goal of election interference will have already been achieved.

And the wall street Democrats and their alies the Dick Cheney establishment Republicans will go back to being the uniparty they are.

The politics of it all is quite entertaining; if it didn't include the complete destruction of our judicial system.

originally posted by: bruce88

originally posted by: WeMustCare

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: WingDingLuey
Has The SCOTUS ever ruled on a "hypothetical" before? 🦓

But this isn't a hypothetical case. Donald Trump is clogging up the courts right now.

Blame the 3 Stooges: Biden-Garland-Smith

Funny how you do not put any blame at all on the person responsible - loser trump!

Who cares about any of them, the majority are going to be dead and barried in the next 5-10 years.

The damage they are all doing to our country will be felt for the next century.

Never said that and you're still not answering the question.....

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: LeXoXeL
So it's okay if you say you want to be a dictator, but it's not okay if you don't say anything about being a dictator? Is it the dictator part you hate or just the fact that it's not your turn?

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: LeXoXeL

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: WeMustCare

I don't think the Supreme Court will touch it, but it begs the question, what is the left so afraid of with Trump?

First former and current campaigning president to "joke" about being a dictator several times and state he would use the military against his political rivals. What's scary about that lol? As long as he is on your side....

The current administration has shown to use the justice system against a political opponent.

Like a dictator, unless he's on your side.

Apparently, to you, it's okay to actually BE a dictator but not say it out loud.

originally posted by: LeXoXeL

Trump has never been a dictator, Biden has.

I hope that makes it easier to understand.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: WeMustCare

I don't think the Supreme Court will touch it, but it begs the question, what is the left so afraid of with Trump?

Jack Smith is trying to save time and keep the March trial date.

The DC Court of Appeals (link) has 9 democrat appointees, and 5 republican ones. He'd most likely get a favorable outcome through appeals... but it would still go up to Supreme Court. It wastes time.

This way, he has a ruling from the district court, and he's taking it directly up.

That's not fear, that's expedience and efficacy.

a reply to: Mahogani

I heard Trump tore the tags off his mattresses.

*boom*

Totally jail time for the Orange Man, bad.

Seems like a question that should have been undisputed before bringing 90 some charges.....


But hey, I'm just a simple moron.