Asher Langton: Since this point keeps getting missed: the SCOTUS ruling wasn’t just about immunity; they ruled that *evidence* from his time in the White House may be inadmissible. The ruling potentially affects every case against him, state and federal, regardless of when the criminal act itself occurred.

Since this point keeps getting missed: the SCOTUS ruling wasn’t just about immunity; they ruled that *evidence* from his time in the White House may be inadmissible. The ruling potentially affects every case against him, state and federal, regardless of when the criminal act itself occurred.

if stealing classified docs and lying about it while no longer in office is an "official act", we are well and truly cooked

It doesn’t necessarily matter that he wasn’t president at the time. It doesn’t matter that paying off Stormy Daniels or stealing classified documents probably doesn’t meet SCOTUS’s Calvinball understanding of an official act. (Yet.)

Will most evidence from Trump’s time in the White House be excluded in the end? Who knows, it’s Calvinball. But what SCOTUS did was inflict maximum chaos on each of his cases, greatly slowing them down at the very least.

This is exactly right, and why it’s a fool’s errand to apply a careful good-faith textual analysis of the decision instead of recognizing the motivation for the decision and the implications of *that*. bsky.app/profile/kitt...

If the court of law has to ignore evidence from Trump's time in office, the court of public opinion needs to step up, examine it in detail (however it can be exposed) analyse it in public, and spread the results loudly ans in chorus. No more bickering, no more picking scabs.

Exactly. We need to accept now that the courts aren’t going to save us in time and proceed accordingly.

I just had a jolt of recognition as to how long we've been using the courts as a placebo to keep people from mutual aid in spreading and using information.

Post