It remains astonishing that SCOTUS waited weeks to even announce they were taking on the presidential immunity case and now we stand on the eve of the last scheduled day of decisions and they still haven't released it -- all but guaranteeing Trump will not face a federal jury before the election.
Fair enough. As a non-lawyer: does every judge need to clear their cases beforehand with SCOTUS? If not, she could proceed and force the issue. What are they going to do, fire her? If Trump gets elected, the federal judiciary is a corpse walking anyway.
IANAL, but in this case, in order to proceed Judge Chutkan would have to overturn *her own ruling* that stayed all proceedings pending the appeal. It’s true that SCOTUS is burning through all credibility at a terrifying pace but no revolt against their authority will begin with a federal judge.
You're right, of course, but any successful revolt would have to begin with a fed judge deciding to do just that. I don't anticipate it happening, obv, but it does need to happen. Big time stakeholders are going to have to act, and act with risk, if we are to pull out of this rule of law nose dive.
She should never have issued a stay in the first place. There was no reason to, as there as no rational basis to think the appeal had any merit.
That was her biggest mistake. The trial could have been *over* by now if she hadn't done that.
I just don’t believe that’s how the judicial system works. I agree that corruption in SCOTUS is a crisis for the nation, but I disagree that’s within Chutkan’s power to correct
You mean the scotus that is like half comprised of appointments made by someone who attempted to overthrow the US government? Of course they did. They are objectively part of the ongoing plot to overthrow the government. Can't stop now.
It's worse than that. Jack Smith asked them to skip the appellate process in December 2023. They managed to swiftly write disqualification out of an Amendment, but they didn't move quickly with immunity.
What happens when they don't even release it on the last scheduled day of decisions?
Just because it's never happened before doesn't mean it can't happen next week
"last scheduled day of decisions" is pretty malleable; it's not set by law and the court announces days in which it will release opinions. Traditionally they're done by end of June, but it's just that - tradition. They can, and I believe have occasionally, run into July.
Oh I agree. But I don't even trust this court to release an opinion on this case. Like, who's going to compel them to release an opinion, if their majority just chooses not to?
No one, but why do that instead of a Bush v. Gore "just this one time you guys, don't even think about citing this as precedent" opinion that gives the desired outcome while giving a fig leaf of legitimacy for the rubes?
