Rick Hasen’s Live Blog of the Supreme Court’s Oral Argument Over Trump’s Claim of Immunity in the Federal Election Subversion Case (Refresh this page frequently for updates) electionlawblog.org?p=142644
Sauer's argument for Trump is breathtaking in allowing the President to murder or commit a coup so long as it is wrapped in the trappings of a President's official acts.
This argument still has a ways to go. But it is easy to see the Court (1) siding against Trump on the merits but (2) in a way that requires further proceedings that easily push this case past the election (to a point where Trump could end this prosecution if elected).
Dreeben stresses that what Trump was charged with, trying to subvert the election, is not part of any official acts. Alito wants to avoid the facts of this case (for good reason!).
Alito tries to turn things on their head, by saying that to encourage peaceful transitions of power, you need to give incumbents absolute immunity so they will leave and won't worry about prosecution later. This is the most insane thing I've heard today (and there have been many crazy things).
No, the domain is this Supreme Court, which is, at a minimum, taking too long to say a crime is a crime regardless of who does it. And we are hoping they aren't engineering a decision that it isn't a crime if a particular president does it. We can't trust a court like that with our thoughts.
