SCOTUS

[USUC]

I'm so beyond disgusted by this. I've always taken comfort thinking that the Supreme Court was the one institution that could ultimately be counted on to save us from ourselves, that they were above the fray. Turns out they're not. They're just another group of bought and paid for politicians.

Is the purpose of SCOTUS to save us from ourselves? That seems to be beyond the scope of the judicial system. In fact, Roberts seems to have stated several times that they aren't supposed to operate that way.

[falafel]

I'm so beyond disgusted by this. I've always taken comfort thinking that the Supreme Court was the one institution that could ultimately be counted on to save us from ourselves, that they were above the fray. Turns out they're not. They're just another group of bought and paid for politicians.

Or just another group of fallible humans.

[Commando]

Is the purpose of SCOTUS to save us from ourselves? That seems to be beyond the scope of the judicial system. In fact, Roberts seems to have stated several times that they aren't supposed to operate that way.

I mean isn't checks and balances supposed to be a thing? We'll see...

[USUC]

I mean isn't checks and balances supposed to be a thing? We'll see...

I just think the hand-wringing about this is strange. I mean, why did it take Biden's DOJ almost 3 years to bring charges in the first place? The defendant is entitled to a speedy trial, not the prosecution. The DOJ taking so long ensured this wouldn't be concluded by the election.

[Commando]

I just think the hand-wringing about this is strange. I mean, why did it take Biden's DOJ almost 3 years to bring charges in the first place? The defendant is entitled to a speedy trial, not the prosecution. The DOJ taking so long ensured this wouldn't be concluded by the election.

sure plenty of blame to go around. But setting it out 2 months is interesting. Didn't Bush v Gore get decided in like.. 3 days?

[beefytee]

As someone with no legal background, I'm surprised the court is taking this. Is there really a valid argument for immunity? I would have expected it to be dismissed pretty quickly.

Why do you think the court is taking this case?

[Commando]

As someone with no legal background, I'm surprised the court is taking this. Is there really a valid argument for immunity? I would have expected it to be dismissed pretty quickly.

Why do you think the court is taking this case?

I think just because it's an issue of national importance. I really think it borders on frivolous, but where so many of his followers take him seriously, the Court has to at least narrow the scope of what presidential actions are protected and what aren't.

[falafel]

As someone with no legal background, I'm surprised the court is taking this. Is there really a valid argument for immunity? I would have expected it to be dismissed pretty quickly.

Why do you think the court is taking this case?

Some have speculated that with such an important issue (if the arguments were real), the Court really wants to put some authority on it. I'm not surprised they are taking it, but I wish they could move quicker. Even with an expedited briefing schedule and quicker hearing in April, I don't expect a decision until June at the earliest. Not sure we'll get any kind of verdict on the Jan 6 case before the election.

Can you image if Trump win and then gets convicted?

[BlueK]

I just think the hand-wringing about this is strange. I mean, why did it take Biden's DOJ almost 3 years to bring charges in the first place? The defendant is entitled to a speedy trial, not the prosecution. The DOJ taking so long ensured this wouldn't be concluded by the election.

It was Merrick Garland's fault. He only went after those who physically assaulted the capitol and did nothing to investigate Trump's actions in trying to overthrow the election and everything that led to the attack on the capitol until the House committee did the investigation for him and handed him their findings. Only then did he appoint the Special Counsel. Jack Smith has done great given the unbelievable fail by the DOJ before he was appointed.

[frank ryan]

It was Merrick Garland's fault. He only went after those who physically assaulted the capitol and did nothing to investigate Trump's actions in trying to overthrow the election and everything that led to the attack on the capitol until the House committee did the investigation for him and handed him their findings. Only then did he appoint the Special Counsel. Jack Smith has done great given the unbelievable fail by the DOJ before he was appointed.

Great post. I'd add that the pitiful slowness by Garland did not ensure the case wouldn't be resolved and doesn't diminish the validity of concerns SCOTUS critics have about this.

[frank ryan]

I just think the hand-wringing about this is strange. I mean, why did it take Biden's DOJ almost 3 years to bring charges in the first place? The defendant is entitled to a speedy trial, not the prosecution. The DOJ taking so long ensured this wouldn't be concluded by the election.

Really? It seems like that is always a safe expectation. Even if I thought it was a great choice, I would be surprised if there was discontent or outrage by some party.

[All-American]

SCOTUS reverses the Colorado Supreme Court on grounds that Congress, not the states, is responsible for enforcing section 3.

A majority also holds that the exclusive vehicle for enforcing is via legislation. Two other opinions, one by Justice Barrett and one by Justice Sotomayor (with Justices Kagan and Jackson concurring), criticize the majority for deciding an issue not necessary to the judgement. In other words, the majority appears to hold that any legislation that would allow Trump to be disqualified does not currently exist.

[Commando]

SCOTUS reverses the Colorado Supreme Court on grounds that Congress, not the states, is responsible for enforcing section 3.

A majority also holds that the exclusive vehicle for enforcing is via legislation. Two other opinions, one by Justice Barrett and one by Justice Sotomayor (with Justices Kagan and Jackson concurring), criticize the majority for deciding an issue not necessary to the judgement. In other words, the majority appears to hold that any legislation that would allow Trump to be disqualified does not currently exist.

lol and you know if there's anybody we can count on to act boldly, decisively, and apolitically, it's Congress!

I guess the supreme law of the land doesn't count as legislation now.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Unanimous decision. Interesting.

This is the right call. The only way to defeat MAGA is at the ballot box.

[Donuthole]

Unanimous decision. Interesting.

This is the right call. The only way to defeat MAGA is at the ballot box.

Correct. I hate the man and want nothing more than for him to never be president again. But the electorate has to be the ones to douse the fire--anything else is just going to fan the flames.