i wonder if they're bringing up stuff he did in the white house so now they can try to get the case halted and tossed on the "official act' immunity the gang of six just made up yesterday
Their argument is that the prosecution partially relied on things he did while president as evidence, and that might now be inadmissible due to Trump v. U.S.
But it’s also a clear sign that no matter how Roberts might have pretended to thread a needle, Trump and his administration see this as absolute immunity for anything they do, in office or not.
I’m sure the appellate judges in New York will agree. What happens when this goes federal is anyone’s guess. Had the majority gone with Barrett’s opinion instead, I’d feel better. That they didn’t says something dark.
If she wasn’t going to join the dissent, Barrett really should have called more attention to the majority’s bullshit by making this a 5-3-1 opinion instead of joining the majority in part.
Yes, I too am shocked that the firebreathing conservative appointed by the convicted felon didn't make a stand against firebreathing conservatives and the convicted felon.
I'm not shocked, but I think Barrett's slight shift away from her Republican colleagues has been notable, and whether that continues remains to be seen.
I do think if something karmically and legally appropriate were to happen to two out of Alito, Thomas, and Kavanaugh so that Barrett became the swing vote, it's still a right-of-center Court, but there are worse outcomes for the Court.
It was a right-of-center court before Scalia's death. Getting back to 5-4 with Barrett, Roberts, and Gorsuch as rotating swing votes would be a massive improvement.
