This is the opinion the country was waiting for. Straight loss for Trump. “Former President Trump’s alleged efforts to remain in power despite losing the 2020 election were, if proven, an unprecedented assault on the structure of our government. “
“At bottom, former President Trump’s stance would collapse our system of separated powers by placing the President beyond the reach of all three Branches. Presidential immunity against federal indictment would mean that, as to the President, the Congress could not legislate, the Executive could not prosecute and the Judiciary could not review. We cannot accept that the office of the Presidency places its former occupants above the law for all time thereafter. Careful evaluation of these concerns leads us to conclude that there is no functional justification for immunizing former Presidents from federal prosecution in general or for immunizing former President Trump from the specific charges in the Indictment. In so holding, we act, “not in derogation of the separation of powers, but to maintain their proper balance.”
@neal_katyal You think they'll refuse it, Neal? They've really NOT been wanting to hear any of his cases, I've noticed. I think they'll kick it back to the lower court, save themselves.🤷☮️
@PhoenixWildish @neal_katyal They don't need to "kick it back." SCOTUS can deny certiorari and let the ruling stand.
@PeterHLemieux @neal_katyal Thank you, that's the word I couldn't recall to save my life, lol. That's actually what my old brain was trying to get me to articulate lol. And I had a full ride to #Willamette once for law, you'd think I'd be able to remember certiorari! 🤦🤦🤦 Thanks, Peter! Appreciate you! 😊