Special counsel Jack Smith urges Supreme Court to reject Trump's claim of immunity

[riversedge]

Source: cnn




By John Fritze, Tierney Sneed and Hannah Rabinowitz,


2 minute read Updated 7:39 PM EDT, Mon April 8, 2024


Special counsel Jack Smith urges Supreme Court to reject Trump’s claim of immunity
Hannah Rabinowitz
By John Fritze, Tierney Sneed and Hannah Rabinowitz, CNN
2 minute read
Updated 7:39 PM EDT, Mon April 8, 2024


Special counsel Jack Smith urged the Supreme Court on Monday to reject Donald Trump’s claims of sweeping immunity and to deny the former president any opportunity to delay a trial on charges that he attempted to subvert the results of the 2020 election.

Trump’s position, Smith told the court, has no grounding in the Constitution, the nation’s history or Americans’ understanding that presidents are not above the law.

“The Framers never endorsed criminal immunity for a former President, and all Presidents from the Founding to the modern era have known that after leaving office they faced potential criminal liability for official acts,” Smith told the court.


Smith’s filing landed in what has emerged as the most closely watched case of the Supreme Court’s current term. A broad ruling for Trump could undermine not only the special counsel’s election subversion case, but a litany of other criminal charges pending against him.

The Supreme Court will hear arguments April 25, and a decision is expected by July. Trump’s written reply to Smith is due next week. .........................



Read more: https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/08/politics/special-counsel-jack-smith-supreme-court-trump-immunity-claim/index.html

---

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[SamKnause]

1. There is only one reason that the supremes would rule trump has immunity, corruption.

We already know the supremes decisions are questionable.

Bush election.

Corporations are people.

Money is speech.

They are to blame for many of the major problems this country faces.

[riversedge]

7. +

[LetMyPeopleVote]

2. Jack Smith has filed his brief on the immunity issue

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Here is a link to the filing
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-939/306999/20240408191803801_United%20States%20v.%20Trump%20final%20for%20filing.pdf

[republianmushroom]

3. Thank you, Jack and team.

[GB_RN]

4. SCOTUS Should Never Have Taken This...

They should have just left it at the DC Court of Appeals and been done with it. Now, Roberts has to not only deal with this case, but the consequences of further erosion/destruction of whatever legitimacy his court has remaining - assuming there’s any left at this point.

If I had to bet, since it only takes four to hear a case, Roberts himself was probably a “no” vote. Clarence “Uncle Slappy” Thomas, Scammy Alito and probably Gorsuck. Then you pick between “The Handmaiden”, Amy
COVID Barrett and Beerbong.

[Unwind Your Mind]

5. I'm watching the first block of Jen Psaki's show

On this filing. Recommended 😊

[riversedge]

6. National Security Officials File Amicus Brief Slamming Donald Trump

National Security Officials File Amicus Brief Slamming Donald Trump
The brief argues that nobody is above the law

https://www.meidastouch.com/news/national-security-officials-file-amicus-brief-slamming-donald-trump




Aaron Parnas 2 hours ago

Fifteen former national security officials have filed an amicus brief with the United States Supreme Court in advance of the late-April oral arguments in Trump v. United States, a case that could decide whether Donald Trump is criminally immune from prosecution in Special Counsel Jack Smith's D.C.-based prosecution. The brief filed today argues that nobody, not even the former President of the United States, is above the law and that nobody should be entitled to the absolute immunity Trump is asking for in his filings.

The brief argues that:

"[Trump's] broad view of immunity would imperil U.S. national security, weaken the authority of the President, and throw confusion into the chain of command of the armed forces, which the President, as Commander-in-Chief, commands."

The former national security officials include Generals who served in the United States Armed Forces and highlight the national security concerns with Trump's absolute immunity argument.

Read the full filing below:..................................