General Discussion

StarfishSaver

(18,486 posts) Thu Jul 9, 2020, 10:12 AM Jul 2020

YES! Trump v. Vance goes against Trump 7-2

Court rules that the president does not have absolute immunity.

"Article II and the Supremacy Clause do not categorically preclude, or require a heightened standard for, the issuance of a state criminal subpoena to a sitting President."

Roberts wrote the opinion. Alito and Thomas, of course, dissenting. It wasn't even close and the Chief Justice wrote the opinion.

Wow! This is HUGE.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/19-635_o7jq.pdf

13 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

YES! Trump v. Vance goes against Trump 7-2 (Original Post) StarfishSaver Jul 2020 OP

Guessing the two are Thomas and Alito? The Velveteen Ocelot Jul 2020 #1

Yep dalton99a Jul 2020 #3

Of course - here's the case StarfishSaver Jul 2020 #6

Thanks! The Velveteen Ocelot Jul 2020 #11

You call him Fat Nixon. Nixon was so much more morally acceptable than this piece of shit BComplex Jul 2020 #12

Be still my heart! n/t ariadne0614 Jul 2020 #2

Gorsuch and Kavanaugh concur. dalton99a Jul 2020 #4

Ha, ha! The Velveteen Ocelot Jul 2020 #5

Kavanaugh... That blows my mind. Mike 03 Jul 2020 #7

Thank God, the SCOTUS still has a spine! honest.abe Jul 2020 #8

You lose Trump. Your day is coming you piece of shit. shockey80 Jul 2020 #9

I'm no lawyer, but it seems they have indicated a way Trump could continue to fight in other courts flor-de-jasmim Jul 2020 #10

Sure. All they did was remanded the cases to the lower courts The Velveteen Ocelot Jul 2020 #13

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,964 posts)

1. Guessing the two are Thomas and Alito?

Reply to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Jul 9, 2020, 10:14 AM

Jul 2020

Gonna go look it up.

dalton99a

(81,683 posts)

3. Yep

Reply to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #1)

Thu Jul 9, 2020, 10:14 AM

Jul 2020

StarfishSaver

(18,486 posts)

6. Of course - here's the case

Reply to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #1)

Thu Jul 9, 2020, 10:15 AM

Jul 2020

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/19-635_o7jq.pdf

Roberts wrote

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,964 posts)

11. Thanks!

Reply to StarfishSaver (Reply #6)

Thu Jul 9, 2020, 10:29 AM

Jul 2020

Even Thomas acknowledges that Fat Nixon doesn't have absolute immunity, but concludes his dissent with:

I would vacate and remand to allow the District Court to
determine whether enforcement of this subpoena should be
enjoined because the President’s “duties as chief magistrate
demand his whole time for national objects.”

GMAFB. "National objects"? Fat Nixon spends most of his time watching Fox, rage-tweeting and golfing. Alito concocts a parade of disasters and what-ifs.

BComplex

(8,082 posts)

12. You call him Fat Nixon. Nixon was so much more morally acceptable than this piece of shit

Reply to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #11)

Thu Jul 9, 2020, 10:56 AM

Jul 2020

we have squatting in our oval office.

I just had to say it.

ariadne0614

(1,746 posts)

2. Be still my heart! n/t

Reply to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Jul 9, 2020, 10:14 AM

Jul 2020

dalton99a

(81,683 posts)

4. Gorsuch and Kavanaugh concur.

Reply to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Jul 9, 2020, 10:14 AM

Jul 2020

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,964 posts)

5. Ha, ha!

Reply to dalton99a (Reply #4)

Thu Jul 9, 2020, 10:15 AM

Jul 2020

Mike 03

(16,616 posts)

7. Kavanaugh... That blows my mind.

Reply to dalton99a (Reply #4)

Thu Jul 9, 2020, 10:15 AM

Jul 2020

honest.abe

(8,688 posts)

8. Thank God, the SCOTUS still has a spine!

Reply to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Jul 9, 2020, 10:16 AM

Jul 2020

shockey80

(4,379 posts)

9. You lose Trump. Your day is coming you piece of shit.

Reply to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Jul 9, 2020, 10:19 AM

Jul 2020

flor-de-jasmim

(2,126 posts)

10. I'm no lawyer, but it seems they have indicated a way Trump could continue to fight in other courts

Reply to StarfishSaver (Original post)

Thu Jul 9, 2020, 10:27 AM

Jul 2020

is that normal procedure?

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,964 posts)

13. Sure. All they did was remanded the cases to the lower courts

Reply to flor-de-jasmim (Reply #10)

Thu Jul 9, 2020, 10:59 AM

Jul 2020

with directions to re-analyze using a particular standard. It does delay the production of the documents but the public wasn't going to see them before the election anyhow because they are part of ongoing investigations. Since all of the lower courts ruled against His Lardship in the first place, the outcome will ultimately be the same.

Reply to this discussion