Judge Juan Merchan has postponed his decision on whether to dismiss Donald Trump’s conviction on presidential immunity grounds until November 19th, following requests for a postponement from both the defense and prosecution. The delay comes after Trump, who was convicted of falsifying business records in a scheme to influence the 2016 election, was elected President of the United States. This decision raises unprecedented legal questions about the impact of Trump’s presidency on his ongoing criminal case, as prosecutors and defense attorneys grapple with the potential implications of Trump’s new role on the proceedings.
Read More
In a recent interview with The New York Times, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sharply criticized the Supreme Court for its decision granting presumptive immunity to former presidents, calling the ruling an “embarrassment to our founders.” Pelosi argued that the court’s decision undermines justice and creates an environment where presidents are above the law. Although she acknowledged her differences with former President Donald Trump, she framed her criticism as a broader concern about institutional integrity. Pelosi also suggested that the timing of President Biden’s withdrawal from the presidential race may have impacted the Democratic primary, potentially allowing for a stronger candidate to emerge.
Read More
President-elect Donald Trump’s legal battles face a dramatically altered landscape following his electoral victory. Experts predict that his federal cases, already in jeopardy due to legal challenges and Supreme Court rulings, will likely be dismissed due to the long-standing practice of not criminally prosecuting a sitting president. Similarly, the Georgia case, while less certain, is expected to be either paused or dismissed, likely due to the statute of limitations expiring. While Trump’s New York sentencing is scheduled for late November, experts expect the outcome to be a mere financial penalty, with a prison sentence highly unlikely given the nature of the charges and the impracticality of imprisoning a president with Secret Service protection.
Read More
It’s mind-boggling to think that we are even having a debate about whether a sitting president is entitled to immunity for blatantly trying to subvert the democratic process. Overturning an election, a hush money fraud, sexual assault, or any other criminal activity are certainly not part of the presidential duties we were all taught in civics class. It seems pretty cut and dry that the duties of the President do not include attempting to overthrow the government that they were elected to lead.
This recent revelation by Special Counsel Jack Smith, highlighting Trump’s private criminal effort to overturn the 2020 election results, underscores the importance of holding our elected leaders accountable for their actions.… Continue reading
Jack Smith is on a mission to reveal the truth about Trump’s alleged criminal activities, and that’s a mission that deserves our attention. In a recent court filing, Smith argued against Trump’s presidential immunity, which has been a contentious issue since the Supreme Court’s decision in July. This filing marks a significant step forward in Smith’s case against Trump, and it sheds light on the complex legal battle that is unfolding.
It’s fascinating to see the lengths to which both parties are going to present their arguments. Smith’s document was filed under seal to protect sensitive information, while Trump’s attorneys are pushing for redacted filings.… Continue reading
When I first heard about the Special Counsel filing a reworked indictment against Donald Trump in the January 6th case, I wasn’t surprised, but I was definitely intrigued. The fact that the indictment has been updated in light of the Supreme Court ruling that presidents have immunity for official duties is a clear indication that this case is far from over. The new indictment highlights that Trump had no official responsibilities related to the certification process but had a personal interest in being named the winner of the election, a crucial distinction that sets the stage for a more focused legal battle.… Continue reading
Chuck Schumer’s recent move to introduce the ‘No Kings Act’ is a bold step towards eliminating presidential immunity and restoring accountability in our government. The concept of having no kings is deeply ingrained in the principles of democracy, and it is disheartening to see the erosion of these values in today’s political landscape. The idea that a president can be above the law is contrary to the very foundations of a republic, and it is crucial that we take steps to rectify this imbalance of power.
The recent Supreme Court ruling granting presidential immunity for official acts was a blatant disregard for the principles of checks and balances that our Founding Fathers so carefully put in place.… Continue reading
President Biden’s recent announcement of a bold plan to reform the Supreme Court and ensure that no President is above the law is a monumental step in the right direction for our country. The proposal includes crucial changes such as the elimination of immunity for crimes committed by a former President while in office, term limits for Supreme Court Justices, and the implementation of a binding code of conduct for Justices.
The proposal to remove immunity for crimes committed by a former President during their time in office is long overdue. No one should be exempt from federal criminal indictment, trial, conviction, or sentencing simply because they held the highest office in the land.… Continue reading
The Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Trump v. US has left many scratching their heads and questioning the intentions of the highest court in the land. Chief Justice Roberts noted the difficulty in distinguishing official acts from unofficial ones by the President, leading to unprecedented and momentous questions about presidential powers. However, the lack of further explanation and the ambiguity left by the Court raise concerns about accountability and the balance of power in our democracy.
It is clear that the Supreme Court’s decision in this case has far-reaching implications beyond just President Trump. By establishing the scope of presidential immunity for official acts, the Court has effectively given the President a shield against prosecution for actions taken while in office.… Continue reading
As an individual who values democracy and the rule of law, the recent news of Schumer pushing a bill to strip Trump of court-granted immunity sparked a myriad of thoughts and emotions. The very essence of our democracy relies on the fundamental principle that no one, not even the President, is above the law. So, when the Supreme Court granted Trump absolute immunity for his official acts, it shook the core of our legal system. How can a President be free to overturn an election against the will of the people? It goes against the principles of democracy that our nation was built upon.… Continue reading
John Q. Hosedrinker