SCOTUS: CONSTITUTION DOESN'T PROHIBIT CRIMINAL SUBPOENA OF THE PRESIDENT (7-2)

[NYC Liberal]

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.

Rejecting a heightened need standard does not leave Presidents with 'no real protection.' To start, a President may avail himself of the same protections available to every other citizen.

Given these safeguards and the Court's precedents, we cannot conclude that absolute immunity is necessary or appropriate under Article II or the Supremacy Clause. Our dissenting colleagues agree,

[Sanity Claws]

1. Happy Days!

I am Snoopy doing a happy dance!

[soothsayer]

2. Yassss!

"Given these safeguards and the Court's precedents, we cannot conclude that absolute immunity is necessary or appropriate under Article II or the Supremacy Clause. Our dissenting colleagues agree," the chief writes.

[Demsrule86]

14. This ruling basically says the president is not about the law and has no more

civil rights than average citizens do in terms of court proceedings...this is huge...BFD!!!

[soothsayer]

3. Wait

"The arguments here and in the Court of Appeals were limited to absolute immunity and heightened need. The Court of Appeals, however, has directed that the case may be returned to the District Court, where the President may raise further arguments as appropriate."

[NYC Liberal]

10. More:

We agree that Presidents may challenge specific subpoenas as impeding their Article II functions.

And although we affirm while Justice Thomas would vacate, we agree that this case will be remanded to the District Court.

Like anything else, the president can challenge specific subpoenas for specific reasons, but he doesn't have blanket immunity to all of them.

[leftieNanner]

4. Who were the two?

I'm guessing Beer Boy and Clarence.

[rpannier]

7. l am betting on alito and Kav

[rpannier]

15. I got half

I just figured Alito is such a you know what, that he was the other. TBH I would have been surprised if the 3nd were Thomas

[Demsrule86]

43. That is not the case so please stop.

[leftieNanner]

44. Sorry

Misinformation. Got carried away.

[Demsrule86]

64. I made an error too...easy to do...I do think this was a double loss

for Trump. The rule of law won today. Trump's idea of being a dictator is over. He has to win the election and with many using paper and voting, I don't think he can cheat enough to win...he barely won last time and we elected Democratic governors in the states that gave him the EC win.

[dware]

47. You would lose that bet.

The 2 dissenters were Alito and Thomas, Kavanaugh ruled against him, as did Gorsuch.

[Cha]

78. Amazing, No?! I bet trump & his Fascist gang are extra

Pissed!

[mdbl]

85. you can always rely on Thomas to do the fascist thing

an a-hole that doesn't deserve to be on the bench.

[safeinOhio]

9. Alito and Clarence.

[whopis01]

40. Why do you keep saying that? They were not the 2. n/t

[leftieNanner]

45. Sorry.

I'm wrong

[TheRickles]

31. Alito and Thomas (see full decision below)

They wrote the two dissents: https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/07/09/nation/read-supreme-court-decision-president-trumps-taxes/

[Demsrule86]

42. Alito and Thomas...so even Kavanaugh doesn't think the president is about the law.

[Laelth]

5. Excellent! n/t

-Laelth

[malaise]

6. And that makes this huge

No presidential immunity

[safeinOhio]

12. There words

No blanket immunity.

[malaise]

26. That is what ultimately matters

The institutions are standing up to this criminal

[safeinOhio]

35. He can still stretch it out until after the elections, but

if he does not win, he is screwed. Jail time.


Get out the vote please.

[lagomorph777]

51. On the bright side, this leaves it open for Biden to use as a campaign weapon.

"What dark secrets is Trump hiding in his taxes?"

[maxsolomon]

66. He'll never see the inside of a prison. Never.

A fine at worst.

Sorry to be a wet blanket. I have very limited faith in the Courts.

[safeinOhio]

69. At least

drain his fake fortune dry.

[Danascot]

60. But but

Jowl boy said he is!

... and what's with Gorsuch? He was an Obama appointee right?

[malaise]

61. Kavanaugh as well

The entire court agreed that there is no such thing as presidential immunity.

That is a slap in the face at the fascist in chief and jowl boy

[soothsayer]

8. But it will still be tied up in court

[rpannier]

16. True. But the precedent is there for the next

loser clown that gets elected

[soothsayer]

17. Hey I'm happy

[malaise]

28. Precisely

He may think he wont his battle but he lost the war

[erronis]

18. 7-2 is a pretty impressive margin. If it had been a 5-4 split it wouldn't have meant as much.

[True Blue American]

21. Kavenaugh and Alito

But they ruled against The House.

Talk about cutting the baby in half?

[TheRickles]

32. Thomas and Alito (see the two dissents, below)

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/07/09/nation/read-supreme-court-decision-president-trumps-taxes/

[gab13by13]

19. It's why Trump was rage Tweeting in all CAPS this morning.

[gab13by13]

20. How could I forget,

thoughts and prayers to Trump.

[ancianita]

22. So Congress proceed through the summer and fall now, right?

[gab13by13]

23. So does this also mean that McGahn

gets fast tracked to testify, or are they claiming confidential information? It would seem to affect his subpoena as well, any lawyers out there?

[Grasswire2]

80. good question nt

[Marthe48]

24. actually weeping

that the Constitution is finally upheld!

[patphil]

25. Justices Thomas and Alito were the two that dissented.

I saw it on the CNN site.

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/supreme-court-trump-decision-07-09-20/index.html

[gab13by13]

30. Alito flies under the radar,

he may be the most partisan justice on the court.

[RussellCattle]

55. You've stated my opinion exactly. He is the most loathsome.

[Peregrine Took]

62. +1000

[NYC Liberal]

65. I'll never forget his mouthing "not true" at Pres. Obama during the SOTU.

[usaf-vet]

70. Maybe so but Obama was right all along. And the Russian money flowing through the NRA is proof.

[gab13by13]

27. We need an explanation for dummies like me.

[JudyM]

76. The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice.

Trump is decidedly not above the law. We are not completely adrift in the ocean, even though it has been feeling that way for far too long. He is answerable for state crimes he allegedly (cough) committed.

[intheflow]

29. Will you edit your post to include the link

to what you're quoting from? Thanks.

[gab13by13]

33. His taxes won't be made public,

but I believe that a grand jury will now have access to Trump's taxes and financial records. Big trouble for Trump. Do they have a golf course close to a prison?

New York AG came through, please proceed.

[onetexan]

48. What i'm unclear about is the "for now" part of the documents accessibility. When can NYAG

request them?

[gab13by13]

52. Cy Vance was just on cable news

saying that his case was going to proceed. Neal Katyal was on cable news saying that the New York case could happen before the election. Once a trial starts then, I believe, that trump's financial records will be subject to disclosure. Trump will still fight the release of his taxes etc., but according to Katyal he won't have a leg to stand on and the case should proceed quickly.

With that said, Katyal is the only expert who feels that the NY case can happen before the election.

[onetexan]

53. Woohoo!! Thank you for the info. Great news!!

[LymphocyteLover]

34. wow-- huge!

[Dopers_Greed]

36. CNN is reporting otherwise

Saying they ruled in favor of Trump.

Are they trying to spin in his favor, or is info getting crossed somewhere.

[cbdo2007]

37. It is cloudy...but he doesn't have to give his tax records over to anyone today...

or probably for the next 6 months at the soonest.

They kicked both of them back to the lower courts to review the specific reasons they want to see the taxes. The SC ruled that he must show them, but the people asking need to state their specific reasons why they are relevant to their cases.

So Trump wins in that he doesn't have to show his taxes before the election. We all win because he will still have to show them and will be held accountable some day (hopefully) when the lower courts clarify how they can be used.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

50. Can't imagine that legalese hasn't already stated reasons.

Adam Schiff is going to make it perfectly clear.

[cbdo2007]

54. It's all in the details of how the House request was worded, and then in Trump's lawsuit

saying he didn't have to provide them.

It is all a shell game with him, always moving the shells.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

81. looking forward to hearing from Schiff.

His words tend to be prophetic.

[lastlib]

57. So much now depends on how the district court

and appeals courts will construe/apply the decision. There is plenty of wiggle room for tRumpski, although historically it is hard to quash subpoenas. He will surely argue that it impedes his function as presidunce, and if that argument carries any weight with the court, it will be after inauguration before he has to turn over anything. In any event, the public likely won't get to see any of it until a trial happens.

[bucolic_frolic]

38. Trump is already Tweet-Whining and saying he'll fight the state's subpoena

or at least that's what they seemed to say on MSNBC

[SmartVoter22]

39. Short & Sweet Ruling

No, Mr President, you do not have immunity.
You may not qualify for a public defender, but you can ask.

[R B Garr]

41. K&R

[cab67]

49. It won't matter.

Trump will just ignore it.

[progressoid]

74. Yep.

His "lawyers" just have to put it off until Nov. That shouldn't be too hard.

[Blue Owl]

75. Kinda where I'm at, based on everything I've seen

These fucks just go about their miserable way with no regard to anything lawful or decent.

I would be thrilled to see some justice served but not counting on it...

[SayItLoud]

56. Time to serve #individual1. NT

[LiberalFighter]

58. Absolutely! There is no absolute immunity in Article II. There is no immunity provided period.

[pandr32]

59. Oooops--another bad day for the Donald!

JUst woke up (Hawaii) to read this. I am smiling while drinking my coffee and it feels great! There usually isn't good news to put a grin on my face in the morning. May DT's losing continue.

[Cha]

79. Aloha! just found out about it now.. had been anticipating

what the out come would be?!

[AllaN01Bear]

67. hot diggity.

[not_the_one]

68. The wheels of justice grind slowly, but they do grind, and grind, and grind, slower, inch by inch.

Unfortunately, by the time the so-called "justice" is arrived at, there is nothing left but the grinding wheel. The barn has collapsed, the horse pulling the grinding wheel is dead. Fat lot of good it does then.

We really need to deal with deliberate delays that are solely for that reason, to delay justice. Those with the money can pay for the delays. The rest of us can't.

In many cases the litigants are dead before the case is resolved. In other cases it takes so long everyone loses interest, or gets lawsuit fatigue, and fold rather than continue, because they are broke. The "system" worked, but not for the people it was supposed to work for.

Our world famous "justice" system either works for every one, rich or poor, or it doesn't. I think the jury is already back on that verdict.

[mvd]

71. It's a very good ruling for us despite the delay it causes

Dump thinks he is above the law. He is not.

Has Thomas EVER voted the right way on a big case like this? I don’t remember one. Alito is a major partisan.

[C_U_L8R]

72. So about that DOJ policy...

the one that claims a sitting President can't be prosecuted.
The one that stopped the Mueller investigation.

That's dead, right?

[Lock him up.]

83. Sadly, not yet. The next Dem-led Congress must pass a specific Bill...

... that will render that false immunity "memo" un-Constitutional and clearly invalid.

Then President Biden will be pleased to sign it into Law.


MAKE JUSTICE GREAT AGAIN

NO MORE FAKE "LAW & ORDER" CRIMINAL CONMAN IN THE WH

LOCK HIM UP!

[bucolic_frolic]

73. Unmentionables

Barr's Unitary Theory of the Executive didn't fare too well today. Trump is not one of the Untouchables.

[kentuck]

77. Does AG Barr still disagree with the Supreme Court and the Constitution of the United States?

His client probably does?

[Onlyserious]

82. Donald needs a pardon...

So, I think discussions with chief cheerleader/sycophant Pense have long since begun. Donald will allow Mama's Boy Pense to have a second campaign to run with the understanding that should they lose by an incontestable margin, The Don will resign on or about Jan. 13, allowing Pense to actually become president and Pense will pardon Trump for all crimes and misdemeanors up to that point. If Pense will or hasn't agree to this deal, then into the woodchopper he goes and Donald will Hail Mary a new running mate that would be cool with being President for a week. The new VP prospect will have to be shameless, reprehensible, and vicious. Sara Palin was all of that, but Trump can do much more damage with a Hannity or Carlson. Perhaps the ultimate Fan Boy, Lindsey Graham, maybe?

Sounds farfetched, I know. But who picked The Donald early on? (Except Putin--different meaning of the word "picked" of course.)

[Lock him up.]

84. Pense *could* only issue blanket pardons on Federal offenses.

He *could* not pardon New York State Law offenses.

NY conman will die in prison.

LOCK HIM UP!