The former president is now highly unlikely to stand trial in the Justice Department’s election interference case before November

The Supreme Court handed Donald Trump a massive victory on Wednesday by agreeing to rule on whether he is immune from prosecution for acts committed while he was president. The court will hear arguments on April 22 and won’t hand down a decision until June — which means it’s unlikely a trial in the Justice Department’s election interference case will commence before the election. If Trump wins the election, he’ll of course appoint an attorney general who will toss the case, regardless of how the Supreme Court rules this summer.

By Wednesday night, Trumpland was celebrating.

“Literally popping champagne right now,” a lawyer close to Donald Trump told Rolling Stone late on Wednesday.

  • Tyfud@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Yes he can. Unfortunately. We all get to watch this birth of a dictator unfold in slow motion if Trump wins.

    • Telorand@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      How? Given the powers that the Special Monitor has, how could he possibly avoid paying?

      RNC certainly doesn’t seem like a likely option right now, and nobody else has ponied up the money.

        • Telorand@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          I always figured the Jan 6 ones were a long shot, but these other two cases are done. He’s going to have to pay, and he can’t get an appeal unless he pays, thanks to NY law.

          That’s why it’s different from the federal ones.

          ETA: and he can’t just not pay, because the Special Monitor has a court-ordered obligation to ensure he pays his court debts. She’ll just seize his assets, which she has the power to do.

            • Telorand@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              It is different, because he’s not the one with the power over his finances. Having a court-appointed Special Monitor who oversees every financial transaction is not remotely the same as just expecting him to pay out of common decency (which he doesn’t have). Lack of evidence is not evidence of lack.

              If he becomes dictator, of course it won’t matter, but that’s a future possibility, not a current reality.

              • Butt Pirate@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                see? It’s happening again. Donnie gets yet another pause, and then he’ll get another, and another, until he’s president and makes the whole thing go away. Delay, delay, delay, obstruct, pause, file useless motions that each need to be deliberated before they can be overturned, etc. etc.

                It doesn’t matter that there’s a special monitor. Nothing matters. Dump won’t face any consequences; It’s the one thing he’s good at.

                • Telorand@reddthat.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  That’s called a slippery slope fallacy. This reduction of the bond fucking sucks, but he has 10 days to pay it (and we’ll see if he does), and that doesn’t ultimately mean he’s off the hook.

                  I get your cynicism, but that does not justify your position that he’s going to ultimately escape, unless you are a legal expert and know more than the other legal experts.

                  It’s possible (though not likely) the final amount will be reduced by the appellate court, but Judge Engoron’s behavior and judgement was above board. Trump will not escape unscathed, regardless.

                  This case isn’t some goofy reading of the Constitution to justify why churches can revive segregation. It’s a standard business fraud case, and the facts speak for themselves.