Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

LetMyPeopleVote

(182,783 posts)
Tue Jan 2, 2024, 10:44 PM Jan 2024

Judges warn Trump lawyers 'discrete issues' need to be discussed in immunity claim [View all]

There have been some interesting amicus briefs filed that raise some issue that TFG may not want to deal with. The Jan. 9 hearing is going to be fun to listen to.



https://www.rawstory.com/trump-2666851559/

The judges tasked with ruling on Donald Trump’s immunity claims have warned both the former president and special counsel Jack Smith to be prepared to discuss “discrete issues” raised in past filings, court records show.

The U.S. Court of Appeals D.C. Circuit Tuesday told lawyers on both teams they should be ready by Jan. 9 to present oral arguments on issues raised in amicus briefs, or information provided by supporting groups.

While it remains unclear what those discrete issues may be, amicus briefs have come in from high-ranking Republicans, attorneys who served in Trump's White House and even a legal watchdog group challenging the D.C. Circuit court's jurisdiction to rule on presidential immunity at all.

In mid-December, a group of Republican lawmakers — including Deputy Attorney General Donald Ayer and former Justice Department official Barbara Comstock — filed an amicus brief backing Smith’s claim that there is no legal precedent for blanket presidential immunity.
25 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
This message was self-deleted by its author agingdem Jan 2024 #1
discrete, not discreet. Ms. Toad Jan 2024 #2
thank you...my. mistake... agingdem Jan 2024 #6
Ahh - Darn!! It is a shame it won't be discreet. LiberalFighter Jan 2024 #22
"discrete" rather than "discreet", which I interpret to mean limited by boundaries nt spooky3 Jan 2024 #4
"Discrete" means separate & distinct. It is not the same as "discreet." tblue37 Jan 2024 #11
This message was self-deleted by its author tblue37 Jan 2024 #12
This would be the best outcome for Smith gab13by13 Jan 2024 #3
Those "discrete issues" include the argument that Smith's appointment as Special Counsel was "ultra vires" onenote Jan 2024 #5
I didn't know Ed Meese was still alive. I thought he became worm shit decades ago.. Stinky The Clown Jan 2024 #7
I had no idea he was still sround, either. ShazzieB Jan 2024 #13
Calabresi has right wing credentials--ugh spooky3 Jan 2024 #8
TFG and the DOJ must answer questions during oral arguments on 1/9 about issues raised in the amicus curiae briefs LetMyPeopleVote Jan 2024 #9
Lawyers' Amicus Brief Adds New Wrinkle to Donald Trump's Immunity Appeal LetMyPeopleVote Jan 2024 #10
Where can we listen to this hearing? ShazzieB Jan 2024 #14
You can't. Oral arguments are not broadcast. onenote Jan 2024 #15
Listen here: scipan Jan 2024 #17
Thanks! ShazzieB Jan 2024 #19
You're very welcome. Nt scipan Jan 2024 #21
So help me here. Is this good or not so good? bluestarone Jan 2024 #16
It's good. The amicus brief (layman's understanding) scipan Jan 2024 #18
Trump lawyers' doozy of a filing on voter fraud LetMyPeopleVote Jan 2024 #20
those lawyers should be sanctioned for submitting that. it is a deliberate waste of the court's time with non-relevent Takket Jan 2024 #24
I thought immunity was before SCOTUS??? What is this about? Takket Jan 2024 #23
Immunity has not reached the SCOTUS LetMyPeopleVote Jan 2024 #25
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Judges warn Trump lawyers...