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

Latest Breaking News

Quackers

(2,256 posts)

13. Maybe I'm misunderstanding something

Reply to Eugene (Original post)

Mon Jun 17, 2019, 12:28 PM

Jun 2019

But how is it not double jeopardy? If you are tried and found innocent at the state level, the federal can now retry you? Can someone help me understand this because I feel like I’m missing something.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

39 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Supreme Court upholds rule allowing state, federal charges [View all] Eugene Jun 2019 OP

This message was self-deleted by its author Chin music Jun 2019 #1

Excellent ruling Pachamama Jun 2019 #2

Well now I wonder how many people will now roll over on Trump since they will not cstanleytech Jun 2019 #3

which means that Trump CAN be charged with State Crimes while Presdient...... ProudMNDemocrat Jun 2019 #4

This message was self-deleted by its author Chin music Jun 2019 #18

RBG and Gorsuch both dissented. mobeau69 Jun 2019 #5

Very different reasons.... hlthe2b Jun 2019 #7

They were separate dissents but still they both dissented. mobeau69 Jun 2019 #8

My point is they dissented for very different reasons... hlthe2b Jun 2019 #9

Can you point out the differences? onenote Jun 2019 #10

I've heard RBG audio speaking on this issue in past years hlthe2b Jun 2019 #11

Again, I don't very different rationales in their dissents. onenote Jun 2019 #14

Again, I don't very different rationales in their dissents. mobeau69 Jun 2019 #29

VERY BAD NEWS for TRUMP! This is a big decision, IMO, since NY States new law to close their hlthe2b Jun 2019 #6

Love Ginsburg's dissent soryang Jun 2019 #12

Maybe I'm misunderstanding something Quackers Jun 2019 #13

It has happened several times. Eugene Jun 2019 #15

I assume it would be the same if you committed a crime that went across state lines. docgee Jun 2019 #19

And also the federal government jmowreader Jun 2019 #26

Except no state lines. Igel Jun 2019 #28

Basically they treat the US as a separate entity, and the state as a separate entity too. So ... SWBTATTReg Jun 2019 #31

It comes down to how much to believe the state and federal government are "separate sovereigns". PoliticAverse Jun 2019 #34

Bye Trumpler geomon666 Jun 2019 #16

That decision is something of a surprise, since it may affect Trump MineralMan Jun 2019 #17

That's probably due to their pesky principals and the way they see the case, never-mind mobeau69 Jun 2019 #33

I would disagree that it's a surprise pecosbob Jun 2019 #20

Wow, I expected that one to go down bitterross Jun 2019 #21

Wasn't this the case that Trump wanted Kavanaugh for? CrispyQ Jun 2019 #22

No, this is the case that some here claimed Trump wanted Kavanaugh for onenote Jun 2019 #38

Thomas' Horrific Concurrence Politicub Jun 2019 #23

What's that Flipper? Cheeto did what? sandensea Jun 2019 #24

Manafort, No Pardon for You!! aeromanKC Jun 2019 #25

I will be thankful DonCoquixote Jun 2019 #27

Tough luck for the dotard Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Jun 2019 #30

RBG wanted to revisit this issue for some time and she finally got her wish... PoliticAverse Jun 2019 #32

Yes, but....a federal pardon is no protection for state crimes Maeve Jun 2019 #35

State and Federal tax evasion are separate crimes and wouldn't be affected by the "double jeopardy" PoliticAverse Jun 2019 #36

True, but I suspect there are some Trumpian crimes that overlap Maeve Jun 2019 #37

I side with Ginsburg and the libertarian Gorsuch Polybius Jun 2019 #39