Donald Trump

[FogBlueInSanFran]

They don’t have to hear it. I think they’ll pass on it personally. Why would they get involved? This is one of the cases where they’d lose either way. Nobody with a brain thinks the President can do what he wants without consequence. But coming to that obvious conclusion will lead to them pissing off Trump. Otherwise they set a dangerous precedent that future opposition presidents could exploit.

The 14th amendment case is the important one and that’s where they’ll expend their political capital if they so choose.

Unless he's blackmailing five of them, why do they care if they piss him off? They're in their jobs for life. And I assure you they don't want to be seen as the court that let the executive branch run roughshod over the judicial branch. I already went back and walked everyone through US vs. Nixon where the precedent related to executive privelege was in part established. That was a court with three justices appointed by Nixon that ruled against Nixon 8-0 (since Rehnquist recused himself) with everyone knowing it meant the end to Nixon's presidency and possible national chaos with the first President likely to be impeached/convicted. I can't imagine they won't grant this cert and rule against Trump.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

Unless he's blackmailing five of them, why do they care if they piss him off? They're in their jobs for life. And I assure you they don't want to be seen as the court that let the executive branch run roughshod over the judicial branch. I already went back and walked everyone through US vs. Nixon where the precedent related to executive privelege was in part established. That was a court with three justices appointed by Nixon that ruled against Nixon 8-0 (since Rehnquist recused himself) with everyone knowing it meant the end to Nixon's presidency and possible national chaos with the first President likely to be impeached/convicted. I can't imagine they won't grant this cert and rule against Trump.

He only has to have leverage over one or two. He could conceivably leverage Kavenaugh/Thomas into dragging their heels in pushing for a full court judgement which could take months. And that's after the full 90 days to appeal the verdict.

 

[kaz7]

Thanks for the replies , good points all round

 

[FogBlueInSanFran]

He only has to have leverage over one or two. He could conceivably leverage Kavenaugh/Thomas into dragging their heels in pushing for a full court judgement which could take months. And that's after the full 90 days to appeal the verdict.

To grant cert, but again, unless it's blackmail, what leverage does he have? Thomas has been rightly dragged through the mud and nothing will stick and there's nothing anyone can do. If the justices themselves believe in their heart of hearts that their fealty is to Trump alone (and maybe the they do) then they're nutters and problems could arise. That could be the case with Thomas or Alito but that's not leverage, that's just nutterism.

 

[SkyBlueFlux]

Unless he's blackmailing five of them, why do they care if they piss him off? They're in their jobs for life. And I assure you they don't want to be seen as the court that let the executive branch run roughshod over the judicial branch. I already went back and walked everyone through US vs. Nixon where the precedent related to executive privelege was in part established. That was a court with three justices appointed by Nixon that ruled against Nixon 8-0 (since Rehnquist recused himself) with everyone knowing it meant the end to Nixon's presidency and possible national chaos with the first President likely to be impeached/convicted. I can't imagine they won't grant this cert and rule against Trump.

I don’t disagree with your opinion if they do decide to weigh-in. I’ve already discussed on this thread that I’m not convinced the 14th amendment case will go the way people expect and that I can see SCOTUS bringing Trump down.

I’m just of the opinion that they will decline to hear this in the first place for the simple reason that I’m not sure it makes sense for them to hear it. This is different to Trump claiming immunity as President, which would be a case of enormous significance and precedent. He’s claiming post-hoc immunity as a private citizen, which is not nearly as compelling or requiring of a sophisticated opinion. They can easily just hand wave this one away to make life easy for themselves. In which case the appeals court decision stands.

 

[Uncle Wally One Ball]

Unless he's blackmailing five of them, why do they care if they piss him off? They're in their jobs for life. And I assure you they don't want to be seen as the court that let the executive branch run roughshod over the judicial branch. I already went back and walked everyone through US vs. Nixon where the precedent related to executive privelege was in part established. That was a court with three justices appointed by Nixon that ruled against Nixon 8-0 (since Rehnquist recused himself) with everyone knowing it meant the end to Nixon's presidency and possible national chaos with the first President likely to be impeached/convicted. I can't imagine they won't grant this cert and rule against Trump.

Glad you walked everyone through that. Sadly the 1970s doesnt apply to the madness that has fallen over the US. Clarence Thomas, demonstrably, lacks the morals and is of dubious integrity. Kavanaugh and the lady who has the eyes too close together trouble me also.

 

[FogBlueInSanFran]

I don’t disagree with your opinion if they do decide to weigh-in. I’ve already discussed on this thread that I’m not convinced the 14th amendment case will go the way people expect and that I can see SCOTUS bringing Trump down.

I’m just of the opinion that they will decline to hear this in the first place for the simple reason that I’m not sure it makes sense for them to hear it. This is different to Trump claiming immunity as President, which would be a case of enormous significance and precedent. He’s claiming post-hoc immunity as a private citizen, which is not nearly as compelling or requiring of a sophisticated opinion. They can easily just hand wave this one away to make life easy for themselves. In which case the appeals court decision stands.

Yeah, I see your point and you're right: that's an important distinction to make.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

To grant cert, but again, unless it's blackmail, what leverage does he have? Thomas has been rightly dragged through the mud and nothing will stick and there's nothing anyone can do. If the justices themselves believe in their heart of hearts that their fealty is to Trump alone (and maybe the they do) then they're nutters and problems could arise. That could be the case with Thomas or Alito but that's not leverage, that's just nutterism.

Gini Thomas may yet have a part to play. If there is enough leverage on her, Clarence may have his hand forced.

 

[FogBlueInSanFran]

Glad you walked everyone through that. Sadly the 1970s doesnt apply to the madness that has fallen over the US. Clarence Thomas, demonstrably, lacks the morals and is of dubious integrity. Kavanaugh and the lady who has the eyes too close together trouble me also.

I am more concerned about Alito, who is a fanatic no matter who is President. He makes Scalia look like the fucking founder of Greenpeace.

 

[TinFoilHat]

Time to threaten his "friends" on SCOTUS...