Post

Avatar
NEW: Judge Merchan postpones Trump's sentencing till September (via Frank G. Runyeon, Law360)
Avatar
NEW: Judge Merchan postpones Trump's sentencing till September (full letter via Tyler McBrien, Lawfare)
Avatar
"If such is still necessary". I think we missed the headline.
I think he has to say that, though.
Avatar
Avatar
1. bullshit 2. he doesn't need 2 fucking months for this shit.
Avatar
Eh. If one commences a criminal enterprise before becoming president, it's possible those steps carried out after inaugeration become moot. It may be that Trump is only sentenced for some of the 34 crimes for which he was already convicted.
Avatar
So it's not happening
Avatar
Avatar
At first I was like WTF? But this may actually be good IF the end result is actual jail time. Seeing him in jail may swing some to not vote for him (I can think of some pearl clutching relatives that would be repulsed by that).
Avatar
Avatar
A 60-day jail sentence puts him in the clink during the election. 🤷🏻‍♀️
Avatar
I would tip the holy shit out of the judge if that happens. Like we could start the Kickstarter now...?
Avatar
Gratuities are legal!
Avatar
We need to tip President Biden and then he can officially tip Justice Merchan ;)
Avatar
god i just want this to end
Avatar
Serious question: Why? State charge. No possibility of immunity, right?
Avatar
they def is arguing that some of the evidence from the trial was inadmissible. Because SCOTUS didn't just rule that he can't face charges for official conduct - you can't even use "official conduct" as evidence in any type of prosecution. So they're trying to have the verdict thrown out.
Avatar
In theory, that restriction shouldn't apply to NY. *stresses in theory*
Avatar
I think the SCOTUS ruling covers prosecutions of all types. "Official conduct" cannot be used as evidence in a criminal trial. His immunity for official acts is "absolute". But IANAL
Avatar
Somebody needs to argue that due to the oath no corrupt actions can be considered official acts of the presidency because the constitution makes it clear they are expected to act in favor of the nation, not themselves. If that could stick then it would neuter the SCOTUS ruling
Avatar
Obviously that still leaves a lot of leeway because there's a lot of ways to make something look like an accidental error as part of legit presidential official acts, but it's worth a try
Avatar
Avatar
Still trying to follow this. If I understand it, a guy murders someone before getting elected president and then orders subordinates to, say, bone saw the body to pieces during an Oval Office meeting. The said bone sawing is NOT admissible as evidence in a murder trial? Really missing democracy.
Avatar
That is correct, because giving orders to his WH aides is an "official act". A NY congressman is introducing a Constitutional Amendment to make it clear the Pres can't just commit all the crimes he wants, and it won't pass, but it's worth trying
Avatar
Assuming that happens, and I suppose it could, do they retry it all over again without the evidence in question? Other than the actual checks, that was before he was in office. I can't imagine all the pre-election colludy stuff being considered "official".
Avatar
again NAL but I believe so, yes -- anything he did before he was Pres is definitionally not an "official act" of the Presidency unfortunately they would not only be missing some evidence, they'd then be facing a defense that knows exactly what their strategy and arguments were
Avatar
True. But he was found guilty on all counts in 15 minutes (ok 2 days). Any sane defense lawyer would try to drop the check counts related and plead out the others. But sanity went bye-bye long ago and obviously this is about getting to say the conviction was tossed before the election. (also NAL)
Avatar
They'll say *every* count relied on excluded evidence. It's basically the same crime 37 times, so I don't see how you can separate out anything. Either there's enough evidence to convict anyway, or not. And Trump will never take a plea. Why would he? He gets everything he wants, all the time.
Avatar
SCOTUS wrote the decision to specifically provide this out for Trump. They didn’t define official vs unofficial, so now all of the courts have determine it, which allows all of the existing cases to grind to a halt. They knew what they were doing.
Avatar
Should I read anything into "if such is still necessary"
Avatar
Yes. The def is trying to have the verdict vacated on the premise that, thanks to SCOTUS's President King ruling, some of the evidence in the trial was from "official acts" and therefore inadmissible. There's a >0% chance the whole trial is thrown out.
Avatar
What in the actual fuck!?
Avatar
Yes. What the fuckitey fuck fuck!?
Avatar
Trump will try to get the NY courts to vacate his conviction on the basis of yesterday's decision. If he can't get them to delay sentencing past the election to deal with that claim, he'll seek either cert or an original habeas petition, hoping SCOTUS will at least stall long enough for him.
Avatar
Guessing summer vacation schedules played a role here, too?
Avatar
I wondered this. Huge numbers of NYC professionals leave the city in August. Or maybe the docket is busy in August.
Avatar
Avatar
Avatar
Avatar
He’s been a fucking coward the whole time
Avatar
Avatar
Avatar
This past year or two has really exposed the fact that we have one fucked up judicial system. Definitely two-tiered - and it ain't Dem/GOP, or even necessarily raced-based (though that falls under the umbrella). It's absolutely rich vs not rich and connected vs everyman.
Avatar
Avatar
Avatar
Ah, well. Nevertheless...
Avatar