Supreme Court is very good to Donald Trump - [but see below\

[Boats]

Supreme Court is very good to Donald Trump
By: Harry Litman Los Angeles Times/Star Tribune - 02-29-24 — 11:39AM
Re: https://www.startribune.com/supreme-...ump/600347151/

Opinion editor's note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes a mix of national and local commentaries online
and in print each day.

Given the U.S. Supreme Court's possible responses to Donald Trump's appeal of the D.C. Circuit's denial
of his claim of immunity from prosecution, the justices' decision Wednesday has to be counted as a gift
to the former president. That's because the court came through for him on the most important axis: time.

The court's fairly Delphic order retains a stay on the case pending its consideration of the merits, with
oral arguments scheduled for the week of April 22. Doing the math, that means the all-important election
interference trial in U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan's Washington courtroom will not begin for at least
six months or so, around late August.

At best, that means there is no more margin for error if the case is to go forward this year. And even at
the earliest possible date that it could proceed, the country will be in the homestretch of a presidential
campaign that the trial would substantially distort. That's a potential problem not just for Trump but
also for the American people.

And of course the trial may not begin before the November election, in which a Trump victory over
President Joe Biden would completely upend the legal and political landscape.

That's because the trial judge can't really abridge the amount of time that remained in the pretrial
process before Trump's appeal stopped the clock. Trump would scream that the court is violating
his due-process rights if Chutkan gave the president less time to prepare his defense.

President Donald Trump speaks at a campaign rally, Thursday, Jan. 9, 2020, in Toledo, Ohio.
(AP Photo/ Jacquelyn Martin) President Donald Trump at a campaign rally in January.
Opinion editor's note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes a mix of national and local commentaries
more online and in print each day.

•••

Given the U.S. Supreme Court's possible responses to Donald Trump's appeal of the D.C. Circuit's
denial of his claim of immunity from prosecution, the justices' decision Wednesday has to be
counted as a gift to the former president. That's because the court came through for him on
the most important axis: time.

The court's fairly Delphic order retains a stay on the case pending its consideration of the merits,
with oral arguments scheduled for the week of April 22. Doing the math, that means the
all-important election interference trial in U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan's Washington
courtroom will not begin for at least six months or so, around late August.

At best, that means there is no more margin for error if the case is to go forward this year.
And even at the earliest possible date that it could proceed, the country will be in the
homestretch of a presidential campaign that the trial would substantially distort.
That's a potential problem not just for Trump but also for the American people.

And of course the trial may not begin before the November election, in which a Trump
victory over President Joe Biden would completely upend the legal and political landscape.

That's because the trial judge can't really abridge the amount of time that remained in
the pretrial process before Trump's appeal stopped the clock. Trump would scream that
the court is violating his due-process rights if Chutkan gave the president less time to
prepare his defense.

ADVERTISEMENT

And while the Supreme Court has scheduled a fairly prompt consideration of the appeal,
it's far from the fastest the justices have ordered. Trump's team has a full three weeks
before their brief on the merits is due, and the oral argument is almost two months away.

The court's consideration of this motion, moreover, was hardly warp speed for a case of
this importance and exigency. The justices took 13 days to decide how they would handle
the appeal. Again, fast — but I've seen faster.

In fact, the time it took had many court watchers surmising that one of the justices must
be writing a dissent. But Wednesday's order was short, bland and without dissent.
(That's not to say it was unanimous — just that no judge in the minority opted to write in
opposition to the decision to take the case, which would have been unusual.)

On the other hand, the Supreme Court's decision does not ultimately augur a reversal of
the D.C. Circuit's resounding rejection of Trump's immunity argument. My strong sense
is that the justices won't uphold Trump's far-reaching and fundamentally anti-constitutional
claim of a wholly immune president. The opinion of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals —
joined by Republican and Democratic appointees alike — should lay that claim to rest.

More likely than finding fault with the circuit court, the justices, probably beginning with
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., decided the issue is of sufficient magnitude that they
couldn't let the final decision, however persuasive, come from a lower court. Fundamental
questions of executive power simply fall within the Supreme Court's job description.

One possible clue to the court's thinking is the order's formulation of the question presented:
"Whether — and if so, to what extent — a former president enjoys immunity from criminal
prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his tenure in office."

Throughout the case, Trump has argued that the conduct at issue fell within the outer
perimeter of his official responsibilities. This depends on construing his encouragement of
the Jan. 6, 2021, rioters as mere political speech.

His prospects for prevailing on that ground are negligible. In fact, several other courts have
been hostile to similar arguments from Trump. For example, also on Wednesday, an Illinois
court became the latest to determine that he engaged in insurrection and is therefore -
disqualified from the presidency under the 14th Amendment.

So even if the Supreme Court were to find some version of presidential immunity from
prosecution for official acts, it wouldn't necessarily save Trump if his conduct fell outside
his responsibilities.

Again, though, Trump's fortunes have to be measured by the time involved as well as the
merits. And a pretrial back-and-forth over whether his conduct fell within his duties could
take up even more time.

In the long run, therefore, the court's decision probably won't excuse Trump from
accountability for his traitorous conduct on the merits. His outlandish claim of absolute
presidential immunity will almost certainly fail, and even a recognition of limited immunity
for official acts will not keep him from facing justice.

But that's in the long run. For now, Trump is likely pleased with a result that again delays
justice and, if his political gamble on a return to the White House pays off, will allow him
to escape it altogether.

Note: Harry Litman is the host of the "Talking Feds" podcast.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Personal note: If he get a walk - so much for the process of the law 'as so written
into the Constitution.'
-
At the very best if he should be denied to hold any future of a re-election and be
damn lucky he isn't being sent to prison. He's con - always has been you can't
change the mannerisms of a so called Supreme Leader as he feels he's one.
-
His dealing abroad - his personal life is of his own doing - his business life
is the act of a con-artist and a liar on all ends. His self-endowment is BS
and everyone know's it. He will be damn lucky he's not found guilty and
sent to prison.
-
The 20's - 30's and 40's were gangsters and shysters' his demeanor fits
that category.
-
He's a draft dodger - he breaks more laws than he gets called upon to
suffer for.
-
If the Supreme Courts let's him walk or get re-elected so much for the
America we once knew. He's not above the law - he selected two or
three judges while in office - they owe him something even if its
highly unlikely - but that's what he's counting on.
-
The two house's better get their shit together and get this country
back into action - and sustain the Rule-Of-Law - and "not to dicker"
with fancy party dancing around while in Congress. Get America back
on track and show some responsibility.
-
I'm depressed each time I see you guys in you're house's the floor.
It's like a pissing match with all the back and forth - resulting in
non-compliance because you're backers don't want to come to
fruition! Today everything is amount money - more-so for those
who have shit full - not people but you're kick-backs and donations
those people support your BS and make them more money!
-
GET YOUR ACT TOGETHER AND GET THE PEOPLE'S BUSINESS.
-
We're taking shellacking from all of you BS you do while in Congress.
-
We put you in office - we can sure hell "vote you out" your next
or if its bad enough put you in prison for illegal backdoor backing
in support of your backer's best interest and the people of America
but here again retaining your stature while in office. As well as
benefit by kick-backs and support for re-election!
-
Don't tell us this is all BS - we see it - we here it - and you know it!
-
Clean up your houses - or step down - or be arrested for compromising
what truly needs to be passed - or to struck down.
-
We are not stupid and today you guy's look really bad!
-
Boats