Donald Trump urges federal appeals court to grant him immunity from criminal prosecution in election subversion case

3 years ago by MicroWave to c/politics

Donald Trump urged a federal appeals court to throw out the federal election subversion criminal case in Washington, DC, again arguing in a filing late Saturday that he is protected under presidential immunity.

Trump wants the DC Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn a lower-court ruling rejecting his claims of immunity in special counsel Jack Smith’s election subversion case. The appeals panel is weighing Trump’s request, which the Supreme Court on Friday refused to take up on an expedited basis, as Smith requested.

The filing reiterates what the former president’s lawyers have repeatedly asserted – that Trump was working in his official capacity as president to “ensure election integrity” when he allegedly undermined the 2020 election results and therefore has immunity, and that his indictment is unconstitutional because presidents cannot be criminally prosecuted for “official acts” unless they are impeached and convicted by the Senate.

Rapidcreek 96 points 3 years ago

This argument should be laughed out of court. Elections are not under the purview of the President of the United States, constitutionally or statutorily.

path: 0 6221679, hotness: undefined, score: 96, children: 0

FlyingSquid 59 points 3 years ago

I am no legal scholar, but I don't see any way for a court to find Trump has that immunity but Biden doesn't. I really don't know that any high court loves Trump enough to give Biden that sort of power. Maybe I'm wrong, but I hope I'm right.

Remember, SCOTUS refused to indulge Trump's election denial claims.

path: 0 6221131, hotness: undefined, score: 59, children: 8

TechyDad 44 points 3 years ago

That's always my first thought as well. If the President has criminal immunity, then Biden could order the FBI to arrest Trump and send him to Guantanamo without notifying any courts/lawyers/family members. He could then have prominent Republicans/right wing figures killed in "accidents."

Not that Biden would do any of that stuff, but he theoretically could. Do any right wingers really want to give Biden that much power?

path: 0 6221131 6221633, hotness: undefined, score: 44, children: 7

Jaysyn 24 points 3 years ago

Accidents my ass, Joe can start hunting SCotUS Justices for sport if they fuck up & find that a President is immune to criminal prosecution.

path: 0 6221131 6221633 6222350, hotness: undefined, score: 24, children: 5

IphtashuFitz 8 points 3 years ago

I’d just be happy if he dissolved the current SCOTUS then created a new one with term limits, independent ethics oversight, etc.

path: 0 6221131 6221633 6222350 6224494, hotness: undefined, score: 8, children: 1

Pips 1 point 3 years ago

Congress could dissolve the Court on Tuesday if they wanted to. Impeach and removal. Not every justice has behaved egregiously enough to merit it, but it's a political decision anyway.

path: 0 6221131 6221633 6222350 6224494 6227635, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 0

gravitas_deficiency 7 points 3 years ago

Don’t tempt me with a good time.

path: 0 6221131 6221633 6222350 6223221, hotness: undefined, score: 7, children: 0

Carlo 0 points 3 years ago

path: 0 6221131 6221633 6222350 6227361, hotness: undefined, score: 0, children: 1

Jaysyn 3 points 3 years ago

Law? It'd be perfectly legal. That's the point he'd be making with his Mossberg.

path: 0 6221131 6221633 6222350 6227361 6228396, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 0

FlyingSquid 6 points 3 years ago

And even if they are absolutely sure that Biden wouldn't, they better also be absolutely sure there will be Republican rule in perpetuity, or the next Democrat in office could decide to go on a major revenge streak like Trump couldn't even dream of. I'm guessing they're aware of that.

path: 0 6221131 6221633 6221939, hotness: undefined, score: 6, children: 0

Neato 46 points 3 years ago

If this happens, Biden should just go: "Ok, I'm president for life now until someone overturns this."

Republicans will break their necks getting that decision they want now undone.

path: 0 6222393, hotness: undefined, score: 46, children: 6

Bridger 18 points 3 years ago

He could send hit squads for everyone implicated in j6, end his reelection campaign and retire. If the SC rules for absolute immunity.

path: 0 6222393 6223748, hotness: undefined, score: 18, children: 1

dirthawker0 8 points 3 years ago

And a few for certain corrupt members of the SC as well.

path: 0 6222393 6223748 6223966, hotness: undefined, score: 8, children: 0

vzq -20 points 3 years ago

Uh no?

I mean, I think uncle Joe is a pretty decent guy as far as US presidents go, but I value the whole democracy thing too.

path: 0 6222393 6222546, hotness: undefined, score: -20, children: 3

ITypeWithMyDick 46 points 3 years ago

Woosh

path: 0 6222393 6222546 6223115, hotness: undefined, score: 46, children: 0

Neato 2 points 3 years ago

Agreed. I wouldn't expect a Democrat to do it. But he could just float the idea in public and that should scare Republicans enough to push it through the SCOTUS that the president isn't immune to prosecution

path: 0 6222393 6222546 6225034, hotness: undefined, score: 2, children: 1

lolcatnip 0 points 3 years ago

I kind of want him to just announce he'll have Trump assassinated the same day if the court rules he's immune from prosecution. Not really but it sounds fun in my imagination.

path: 0 6222393 6222546 6225034 6230080, hotness: undefined, score: 0, children: 0

Skanky 23 points 3 years ago

This is definitely the legal strategy I would take if I was completely innocent of what I was being accused of.

path: 0 6223247, hotness: undefined, score: 23, children: 1

macrocephalic 6 points 3 years ago

I couldn't be guilty of trying to overthrow the government, I was the government! Also, vote for me to become president again.

path: 0 6223247 6224948, hotness: undefined, score: 6, children: 0

CharlesDarwin 20 points 3 years ago

Remember what this qlown said about those that plead the Fifth?

path: 0 6223793, hotness: undefined, score: 20, children: 0

rebelsimile 14 points 3 years ago

If the only person who could be convicted of it should be immune from it, then it shouldn’t be a crime. That argument is, in its face, absurd, since the people who crafted the law certainly imagined someone should be subject to it.

path: 0 6224582, hotness: undefined, score: 14, children: 0

resin85 13 points 3 years ago

Every time he trots out this lame attempt to avoid accountability, this is what I think of (from Lethal Weapon 2).

path: 0 6224673, hotness: undefined, score: 13, children: 1

Crowfiend 2 points 3 years ago

Links broken.

path: 0 6224673 6226992, hotness: undefined, score: 2, children: 0

autotldr 3 points 3 years ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

Trump wants the DC Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn a lower-court ruling rejecting his claims of immunity in special counsel Jack Smith’s election subversion case.

The former president has been attempting to delay his March 4 trial in the case, with his fight over the immunity claim underscoring those efforts.

The Supreme Court on Friday rejected a request from Smith for the justices to immediately hear the case before the DC Circuit had a chance to weigh in.

Trump’s team asked the appeals court earlier this month to examine the immunity ruling issued by Chutkan.

Chutkan rejected Trump’s immunity claims, writing in an opinion that his “four-year service as Commander in Chief did not bestow on him the divine right of kings to evade the criminal accountability that governs his fellow citizens.”

They also warned that, in their view, Trump’s indictment “threatens to launch cycles of recrimination and politically motivated prosecution that will plague our Nation for many decades to come.”

The original article contains 507 words, the summary contains 156 words. Saved 69%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

path: 0 6221116, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 0

politics

@lemmy.world

login for more options

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

go to feed...

politics

@lemmy.world

login for more options

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

go to feed...