186
submitted 11 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

The Supreme Court almost immediately granted Special Counsel Jack Smith’s Monday request for expedited consideration—a highly unusual rapid response that highlights the historic nature of the case.

Smith wants the court to weigh in on the question of whether former president Donald Trump has absolute presidential immunity for crimes he’s accused of carrying out while in the White House.

In its response, the high court ordered Trump’s attorneys to file a reply to Smith’s petition by next Wednesday, Dec. 20 at 4 p.m. ET.

The Supreme Court’s Monday decision does not mean it will take up the case—it simply means the nine-judge panel will make that decision on a much faster timeline than it normally would.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] VubDapple@lemmy.world 49 points 11 months ago

The republicans who own the supreme court, chosen by the Federalist Society, are not maga republicans. They might just throw trump under a bus if they thought there was still a way for Republicans to hold onto power without him

[-] Crashumbc@lemmy.world 46 points 11 months ago

It's a risk, but the Supreme Court might also realize that Trump's recent "dictator" rhetoric is a direct challenge to their power also if he gets elected.

Dictators don't allow others to wield any real power.

[-] Chainweasel@lemmy.world 27 points 11 months ago

I wonder if they realize another Trump presidency would make them irrelevant.
Trump is going to rule as a dictator with an iron fist if he's elected again. There won't be a need for 9 justices on the Supreme Court when we have a single Supreme Ruler that does the same job.

[-] xkforce@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago

No they fucking wont.

These same assholes overturned Roe v Wade and did a lot of other questionable things. There is zero evidence they'll suddenly grow a conscience.

[-] toastus@feddit.de 19 points 11 months ago

That's not what OP said.

They will never grow a conscience, but they will happily throw Trump under the bus if it serves them.
He is not one of them so he can easily be made part of the out group.

The very second dumping Trump is better for their aspirations of power than holding on to him they will do just that.
Not for moral reasons though, those don't even fall into consideration.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago

However, this was also the SCOTUS that refused to indulge Trump on his election fraud bullshit.

[-] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 6 points 11 months ago

Just yesterday, they allowed Washington to ban gay conversion therapy under the basis that regulating medical therapy is reserved to the states. A few years back, Gorsuch supported a ruling banning workplace discrimination of LGBT people under the logic that it's sex-based discrimination.

To be clear, Alito and Thomas are straight-up partisan hacks, but the others have some manner of legal ideology, even if it leads to terrible results sometimes. Beyond that, they have lifetime appointments. They don't need Trump anymore and owe him nothing.

[-] davidgro@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

Does sound like a best case scenario. Not good, but still best.

[-] TenderfootGungi@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

In fact, I believe most of these billionaires that hand pick the Supreme Court justices would love to get rid of trump. He is diverging much of their power.

this post was submitted on 12 Dec 2023
186 points (97.9% liked)

News

23301 readers
3629 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS