-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
United States Supreme Court Rules Donald Trump Is Immune For Official Acts And Is Not Immune For Unofficial Acts
- Thread starter Wandering Monk
- Start date
More info....
apnews.com
Highlights: Supreme Court sends Trump’s immunity case back to a lower court in Washington
The Supreme Court is sending Donald Trump’s immunity case back to a lower court in Washington, dimming the prospect of a pre-election trial.
Democracy has just been dealt a major blow.
And many people on the right will celebrate, not in spite of the fact that this is bad for democracy, but because this is bad for democracy.
And many people on the right will celebrate, not in spite of the fact that this is bad for democracy, but because this is bad for democracy.
Regiomontanus
Eastern Orthodox
Maybe. I mean, it is not clear to me just what the decision actually means for Trump. Anyway, the court could have made this ruling long before now; I think the delay was to ensure that Trump will not be in court again before the election.
The good news is, the tiny infinitesimal ray of light in the darkness, is that there will now need to be an evidentiary hearing in at least two of the Trump cases. This might be a way to get some of the evidence seen by more of the public before the election.
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
The Court seems to accept that Trump's actions to pressure Pence and AG's was an acceptable part of the perimeter of his official duties.
Definition of that perimeter seems to have been remanded back down to District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan. Whatever she rules will be appealed BACK to the Supremes. This back and forth will go on for years I fear.
Definition of that perimeter seems to have been remanded back down to District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan. Whatever she rules will be appealed BACK to the Supremes. This back and forth will go on for years I fear.
Pogo
Well-Known Member
Another punt from this Scotus, now we have to relitigate "outer fringes"
This crew is pathetic.
Pogo
Well-Known Member
Yup, that is pretty much what this court is doing, they should have never taken it because the argument left open of fringes was always there even if they had never looked at the case, but it did waste several months. This court will probably go down as the worst in history.
Pogo
Well-Known Member
No, they just blew it off for a later case. Delay granted, won't matter by the time it gets back to us.
The right to a speedy trial has been denied by the SC.
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
I have suddenly become a fan of adding seats to the SC, bringing it up to 11 or 13. This could result in a court that was formed over the course of SEVERAL administrations and bring more balance to rulings and stability to law in the country.
Did you read the ruling?
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
Yes, I did. Did you?
How does this ruling demonstrate that SCOTUS is corrupt?
How so?
The ruling was made in accordance with the Court’s normal processes.
That’s a dangerous slippery slope.
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
Did you read the ruling? I asked earlier. Maybe you missed it.
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
This is so wrong. A felon can't vote, but he can be President!?
Pogo
Well-Known Member
And term limits.