Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, June 19, 2024

Brett Edkins: Fully 48 percent of voters say reaching a verdict in Donald Trump's federal election interference trial is critical before November. But thanks to the Supreme Court, they will enter the voting booth without knowing if Trump has been found guilty of a federal crime.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

The Supreme Court has slow-walked Trump's criminal cases at every turn. In December 2023, the Court denied the Department of Justice's request to hear Trump's claim that he is absolutely immune from criminal prosecution, opting to instead let the question make its way up to the justices through the lower courts. After the D.C. Circuit heard Trump's argument and decided unanimously against him within 28 days, the Supreme Court waited 22 days before it announced it would indeed hear Trump's claim of presidential immunity, scheduling oral arguments for the last day of its term, 57 days later. The ultra-conservative Supreme Court has weaponized time to delay accountability for their friend Donald Trump and influence the November election.

It is increasingly obvious to Americans who are paying attention that the Supreme Court is no longer a neutral arbiter of the law, but a partisan outfit willing to protect its political allies and overturn long-established precedents like Roe v. Wade for ideological reasons.

Trump v. United States presents an obvious conflict of interest for Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. Ginni Thomas' efforts to overturn the 2020 election are well known. Rather than recuse himself and despite the Court's new sham of a code of conduct, Justice Thomas ignored calls from legal experts and Democratic lawmakers. After revelations that a Stop the Steal' flag flew at Samuel Alito's residence, Justice Alito joined Justice Thomas in disregarding calls to remove himself from the case, thumbing his nose at Congress and federal laws requiring justices to recuse themselves when their "impartiality might reasonably be questioned." We simply cannot trust the justices to rule without bias and uphold the integrity of our elections when they're so clearly aligned with Donald Trump.

Pretty straightforward. When Trump's access on a state ballot was threatened, the SCOTUS acted within weeks to rule in his favor. Trump makes wild claims antithetical to the Constitution, and the Court is taking months to issue a ruling, halting a prosecution for stealing classified documents many voters wanted to see decided prior to election day.

Things are what they appear to be.

#1 | Posted by tonyroma at 2024-06-19 10:49 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 5

Yep... "Justice delayed is justice denied" weeks both ways.

This time it is the SC preventing the American people from getting justice.

#2 | Posted by Corky at 2024-06-19 10:56 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

Werks

#3 | Posted by Corky at 2024-06-19 11:01 AM | Reply

It is clear these judges are in the bag for the-------------.

#4 | Posted by Nixon at 2024-06-19 11:08 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 6

Another view:

As of Tuesday, 110 days had passed since the court agreed to hear the Trump immunity case. And still no decision.

This court has lost the benefit of the doubt for myriad reasons, including its willingness to act quickly in cases that benefit Republican interests. In addition to the disqualification case, two and a half years ago, the court scheduled a challenge to the Biden administration's test-or-vaccinate policy two weeks after the justices decided to hear it, and then issued a decision invalidating the policy less than one week later.

In a case in South Carolina decided by the court 6-3 in May, it was not speed but sloth that aided Republicans. The court allowed the state to continue using a 2021 congressional map that a lower court had found was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. Both parties in the case had asked the court to rule by Jan. 1; when no decision was issued by mid-March, a district court panel ordered the contested map to be used in this fall's election.

In the immunity case, the question before the court is this: "Whether and if so to what extent does a former president enjoy presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his tenure in office."

In addressing that question, the court could follow a path well charted in other cases and rule narrowly. The justices need not resolve anything and everything related to presidential immunity. It would be enough to conclude that whatever the precise bounds of presidential immunity, it doesn't extend to orchestrating a monthslong effort to overturn the valid results of a presidential election.

Even if presidents enjoy some immunity for official acts, plotting to remain in office while continuing to question the results of an election they clearly lost isn't one of them.

Leah Litman

#5 | Posted by tonyroma at 2024-06-19 11:46 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

Simple solution. Re-file the case, with the name "Biden" inserted for every reference to "Trump". The ruling will come out prontodente ...

#6 | Posted by catdog at 2024-06-19 12:10 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

#6 | POSTED BY CATDOG

Biden should have an immediate press conference and announce that he concluded that the court would rule in favor of executive privilege and that he would proceed to act accordingly.
And arrest trump for suspected espionage.

Lets get the ball rollin'

#7 | Posted by brerrabbit at 2024-06-19 12:35 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

The SC ruled on Gore vs Wade within days.

The right wing, obviously biased SC has lost all credibility.

#8 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2024-06-19 12:35 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

"As of Tuesday, 110 days had passed since the court agreed to hear the Trump immunity case. And still no decision," writes Leah Litman in "Something's Rotten About the Justices Taking So Long on Trump's Immunity Case" (www.nytimes.com).

This court has lost the benefit of the doubt for myriad reasons, including its willingness to act quickly in cases that benefit Republican interests. In addition to the disqualification case, two and a half years ago, the court scheduled a challenge to the Biden administration's test-or-vaccinate policy two weeks after the justices decided to hear it, and then issued a decision invalidating the policy less than one week later.

In a case in South Carolina decided by the court 6-3 in May, it was not speed but sloth that aided Republicans. The court allowed the state to continue using a 2021 congressional map that a lower court had found was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. Both parties in the case had asked the court to rule by Jan. 1; when no decision was issued by mid-March, a district court panel ordered the contested map to be used in this fall's election.

In the immunity case, the question before the court is this: "Whether and if so to what extent does a former president enjoy presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his tenure in office."

In addressing that question, the court could follow a path well charted in other cases and rule narrowly. The justices need not resolve anything and everything related to presidential immunity. It would be enough to conclude that whatever the precise bounds of presidential immunity, it doesn't extend to orchestrating a monthslong effort to overturn the valid results of a presidential election.

Even if presidents enjoy some immunity for official acts, plotting to remain in office while continuing to question the results of an election they clearly lost isn't one of them.

#9 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2024-06-19 12:51 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Looks like the newest SC Justice in Trump's new term will be SC Justice Cannon.

#10 | Posted by Corky at 2024-06-19 01:27 PM | Reply

The dems had a narrow window to save america, right after they took power, when the could have stacked the court to fix it to represent the american people. But they didn't want to look partisan. So instead trump goes free and democracy dies.

#11 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2024-06-19 01:37 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Executive Orders...the border
title 9
DACA citizenship
If biden and the dems whiff now then they deserve what happens

#12 | Posted by brerrabbit at 2024-06-19 01:43 PM | Reply

#11 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

And I say what's wrong with partisanship? Doing perceived right is not the same as not doing the perceived wrong.
when Obama was denied his supreme court pick, the gloves should have come off then

#13 | Posted by brerrabbit at 2024-06-19 01:48 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"Denies Voters Crucial Information for 2024 Election"
l
Whicj is exactly what the right wing lying crooks on the court want.

#14 | Posted by danni at 2024-06-19 01:52 PM | Reply

"If biden and the dems whiff now then they deserve what happens"

And the people?? Remember them? ,

#15 | Posted by danni at 2024-06-19 02:01 PM | Reply

And the people?? Remember them? ,.....#15 POSTED BY DANNI

Yes I do. the people had a chance to exercise their power when reagan broke the air controllers strike. every union member in the country should have walked off the job
"the peoples" only real power lie in their numbers but the public is so divided that it's "cut off your nose to spite your face" if you think it will antagonize the other side.
I've brought up unions as a lead in to Gandhi...peaceful protest
sheer numbers are all we have to successfully defeat fascism and tyranny
they can only take away our rights if we allow it

#16 | Posted by brerrabbit at 2024-06-19 02:21 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#13

And it would have been easy to do.

Send Biden over to the senate to preside.

Have him refuse to hear any objection when he brings Garland's nomination to the floor.

But no. Obama's commitment to 'decorum' meant that the RWNJs took over SCROTUS.

#17 | Posted by DarkVader at 2024-06-19 07:02 PM | Reply

the thread is GREAT ! AWESOME !!

the same people who celebrated when the entire country was "denied .2020. crucial voter info "

by the democrat media's "election information fraud" of 2020 are now whining and bitching

about being "denied crucial voters info".

---you just can't make this chit up.

and just like that....2 faced hypothetical liar isn't a strong enough phrase for each...and every one of you.

--I honestly enjoy reading threads like this. You make my 'job' so much easier

kilroy was here.

#18 | Posted by shrimptacodan at 2024-06-21 08:44 AM | Reply

#18 | POSTED BY SHRIMPTACODAN

How many times have we told you to get back on your meds?

#19 | Posted by Sycophant at 2024-06-21 11:04 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2024 World Readable

Drudge Retort