The Supreme Court of the United States will not immediately hear former President Donald Trump’s case for presidential immunity, siding with Trump, who argued the court should reject Special Counsel Jack Smith’s request for a speedy review and decision.
The high court on Friday declined Smith’s request for a quick review, meaning that the case will go through the normal process in the appeals court and likely make its way to the SCOTUS from there.
This is a significant victory for Trump and a major setback for Smith, who is racing against the clock to put Trump on trial in front of a heavily Democrat jury before the election.
Polling shows that a conviction could cost Trump several million votes, and if Trump does not have time to get the conviction reversed on appeal before November, there is a chance it could cause damage on Election Day. Trump has denounced the timing of Smith’s prosecution as “election interference,” calling it a political attempt to manipulate the upcoming presidential race.
The SCOTUS’s refusal of an immediate review of Trump’s claims of presidential immunity comes less than two weeks after Smith’s original request, in which he asked the justices to quickly determine if Trump could be legally prosecuted over the various charges related to January 6, which contend that Trump supposedly attempted to overturn the 2020 presidential election results.
“Despite having lost, the Defendant was determined to stay in power,” the indictment asserts. “So for more than two months following Election Day on November 3, 2020, the Defendant spread lies that there had been outcome-determinative fraud in the election that he actually won. These claims were false, and the Defendant knew they were false.”
Trump was indicted on four counts in that specific case, as Breitbart News reported. They include: “One on conspiracy to defraud the U.S.; one on conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding; one of obstruction and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding; and one of conspiracy against rights.”
Smith’s request for a speedy review comes as he tries to stick to his March 4, 2024, trial date in the case, fearing that the case could be delayed into 2025, after the presidential election.“It is of imperative public importance that respondent’s claims of immunity be resolved by this Court and that respondent’s trial proceed as promptly as possible if his claim of immunity is...
1 comment:
"These claims were false, and the Defendant knew they were false.”
This is where Smith's case falls apart. "These claims were false" is strictly an opinion AND it has become more and more clear that SIGNIFICANT fraud took place."
"The Defendant knew they were false” is simply another opinion. That is, unless Smith is telepathic and can read Trump's mind.
Methinks this case will never make it to the Supreme Court. Smith will give up before undergoing that embarrassment and the scolding he would receive from some of the SCOTUS Justices for having brought it.
Post a Comment