Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Goodheart

(5,307 posts)
Fri Jul 10, 2020, 03:17 PM Jul 2020

Why did John Roberts agree to take this New York case in the first place?

Just to delay it? By what's been already six months and likely to last past the election.

Seriously, 9-0 tells me there was no constitutional debate at all. I smell a Republican rat.

13 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

Goodheart

(5,307 posts)
3. Looks to me like he should have just allowed the lower court and Grand Jury to proceed,
Fri Jul 10, 2020, 03:22 PM
Jul 2020

issue an indictment, and then the USSC question could have been the important one: whether or not sitting presidents can be indicted.

This was BULLSHIT.

Demsrule86

(68,440 posts)
4. It ended the bullshit Trump has complete immunity...and is thus above the law. It was
Fri Jul 10, 2020, 03:23 PM
Jul 2020

a good decision.

 

StarfishSaver

(18,486 posts)
5. Not necessarily
Fri Jul 10, 2020, 03:23 PM
Jul 2020

If the Court didn't resolve this issue, it would have remained up in the air. Trump would have continued making this bogus argument - and it could have found its way into other circuits and cases, creating a mess, as well.

I think the Court was probably right to step in and resolve it, once and for all.

BamaRefugee

(3,483 posts)
6. The lower court may well give suggestions to trump on how to change some things and actually win the
Fri Jul 10, 2020, 03:26 PM
Jul 2020

case.
Not sure it's "done".

BamaRefugee

(3,483 posts)
12. Here's exactly what I'm talking about. "Trump gets a chance TO TRY NEW ARGUMENTS" 1st paragraph
Fri Jul 10, 2020, 04:48 PM
Jul 2020
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-10/july-16-hearing-set-in-ny-trump-tax-case-after-high-court-rules

in my work, I have to testify in court often, I see judges who seem to want a case to go in a certain directions sometimes say to a lawyer "now if you were, let's say, citing Jones v. Smith, then I would see that as valid"...
 

StarfishSaver

(18,486 posts)
13. He could do that anyway
Fri Jul 10, 2020, 04:53 PM
Jul 2020

And at least the Court shut down one argument.

No matter what the Court did, someone would complain about it. I think they handled this as well as they could.

Lock him up.

(6,913 posts)
8. New York State prosecutor Vance is looking for how payments to Stormy Daniels...
Fri Jul 10, 2020, 03:33 PM
Jul 2020

... got reported (or IF they were) and if so, were they declared as "Legal fees" and deducted to (partially) avoid paying taxes, which would concord with Cohen's answers in his interrogation.

It is very specific. No need to go through thousands of pages of shenanigans. That can come later...

That could go fast (or not). Find the 1st crime (committed while in Office), and issue an indictment (of Individual 1).

LOCK HIM UP!

MAKE JUSTICE GREAT AGAIN

rsdsharp

(9,120 posts)
9. Roberts alone can't decide to take a case on his own.
Fri Jul 10, 2020, 03:41 PM
Jul 2020

It takes 4 votes to grant cert. Admittedly, there are more than 4 conservatives on the court, but Roberts didn’t agree to take the case even if he voted to grant cert. There were at least 3 other votes.

cbdo2007

(9,213 posts)
10. He wanted to take it to assert conclusively to Trump that he is not above the law.
Fri Jul 10, 2020, 03:55 PM
Jul 2020

That is what the argument was with the SC, not what was actually being heard in the NY case.

Everyone needs to calm down, this is bad for Trump and allows the lower court hearings and the house hearings to continue. Otherwise they would have stopped.

Polybius

(15,309 posts)
11. Simple, impeachment
Fri Jul 10, 2020, 04:15 PM
Jul 2020

They wanted it delayed until impeachment proceedings were over, otherwise it would have come out before the trial.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why did John Roberts agre...