Donald Trump opposes the special counsel’s request for the Supreme Court to decide right now whether he has any immunity from federal prosecution for alleged crimes he committed while in office, lawyers for the former president told the justices in court papers Wednesday.

Special counsel Jack Smith asked the high court last week to review a lower-court ruling that Trump, as a former president, is not immune from the election subversion criminal case. Smith in his appeal to the justices asked them to take the rare step of reviewing the issue before a federal appeals court in Washington, DC, weighs in.

But Trump, whose legal strategy in the case so far has largely revolved around attempts to delay the proceedings, told the justices that Smith should not be able to leapfrog over the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit to resolve the critical issue.

71 points

The right to a speedy trial is the right of the defense and the prosecution. I hope they reject Trump’s motion.

permalink
report
reply
-20 points

Do you have anything supporting your claim that the prosecution has a right to a speedy trial?

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

I heard it from actively practicing lawyers on the Legal AF podcast, and I don’t know which episode. I don’t have a written source to give you.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points
*

I really appreciate this exchange. Someone casually makes a claim, someone else requests sources, and the original poster took the time to respond and detail where they heard the info. Great job on all of you. Now I’ll try to add to the conversation.

IANAL but it looks like it’s a defendant’s right. It’s origins seem to be about protecting a defendant from a never-ending or egregiously drawn out prosecution. I think it’s fair to say that it gives both sides tools in this case. It seems pretty obvious to me that the defendant here (orange man) wants to delay and would maybe even decline his right to a speedy trial if offered the choice. Meanwhile the prosecution can press the judges to keep things moving by pointing out that they (the prosecutors and judges) are legally obligated to give the defendant a speedy trial.

and sources:
https://www.justia.com/criminal/procedure/right-to-a-speedy-trial/
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt6-2-1/ALDE_00012979/
https://www.armfor.uscourts.gov/digest/VB4.htm

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

I’ve only really heard Popok say the common expression

Justice delayed is justice denied

But its more a global and ethical statement that the defendant and the victim and the People deserve to have and see justice be done.

Not sure if there’s an actual affirmative right per se but its more a reflection that Trump has used his wealth and threatening tactics to escape every legal issue he’s created and so fsr basically gotten away with it all. Any normal person would have long been bankrupted and imprisoned long before he was even starting to be properly investigated abd pursued

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Amendment VI: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

I think it was in that thing the orange ape man continually wipes his ass with…I think it’s called the Constitution?

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Look I agree that these proceedings should move quickly to put Trump behind bars.

But… If I’m reading it correctly, that says that the accused has a right to a speedy trial, not the prosecution, which is what the above commenter asked for.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

Trump famously doesn’t have a strong constitution.

permalink
report
parent
reply
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

Yes I do… Down votes!

permalink
report
parent
reply
63 points
*

(IF) He’s innocent, wats the problem with the 🚬highest🚬 Court in all the land clearing his name once and for all lol?

Why wait? Save the Courts all the meritless appeals

permalink
report
reply
39 points

Wasting time that’s why. The longer the delay, the better for him and his campaign of BS lies that people will eat up.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

Or more specifically: he’s hoping to run out the clock while simultaneously clinching the GOP nomination and the presidency, at which point he’ll just pardon himself, immediately kicking off a constitutional crisis of pretty fucking epic proportions. And that’s before he kicks off any of the other constitutional crises he’s undoubtedly champing at the bit to kick off as well.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Oh I know the gam3, I was getting cute cuz its so obvious it must be getting painful. Thanks regardless ;)

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

This is actually a legitimate argument that will be used against him in this matter. He can’t have/want it both ways. He can’t want to simultaneously clear his name (as he is the supposed victim in all this) and also argue for a delay in that process.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

He can’t not think any other way than two ways. The biggest issue these folks have or purposely misrepresent is that when it comes to anything involving them, it can’t be falsifiable. They have to be able to pivot any which way at any time because none of it is real or evidence-backed.

Its a terrifying and miserable existence as opposed to living in truth and letting reality tell the story instead of having to constantly remember lies and bullshit justifications and running into people you lied or screwed

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I knew someone like this, his entire universe was a collection of random lies, and he’d always adapt the story for maximum impact with different audiences. He got a high from it. He lived for that feeling of manipulating people. So unfortunately in my experience, even though he was miserable without the lies, sewing the web of lies was a high point in his life. Normal people would feel sick to their stomachs lying so much, but psychos lack this reaction.

permalink
report
parent
reply
37 points

“Do the thing I specifically hired you to do!”

permalink
report
reply
12 points

I think the conservative justices will be happy to see his demise and the rise of his more competent successor. I doubt he can count on them for any favors.

permalink
report
parent
reply
34 points

Smith in his appeal to the justices asked them to take the rare step of reviewing the issue before a federal appeals court in Washington, DC, weighs in.

There is nothing rare about the request. It’s called “cert before judgement” and the DoJ used it 10 times in the four years that Trump was president.

It’s most commonly used in a situation like this where the appeal is interlocutory meaning the appeal stops the trial cold while it’s resolved.

permalink
report
reply
30 points

Delay, delay, delay.

He knows his ass is toast.

permalink
report
reply
10 points

I don’t even think he’s doing this because his ass is toast. He’s doing it because he thinks he’s going to win the election, and if/when he does he’ll just pardon himself. Then the point is moot.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Honestly, if America is a place where someone can commit treason countless times, get elected, and absolve himself of that treason, I really don’t want to be here anymore.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

And don’t forget he literally ran his campaign on “I think my opponent should be locked up but is escaping justice because rich politicians don’t live by the same rules you and me do”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

Well, you will be, so…then what?

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 16K

    Posts

  • 476K

    Comments