January 6th legal proceedings and investigations megathread

[Ljube]

I think the only way the Supreme Court can stay out of politics is for them to sit on this appeal until after the election. If Trump wins, his AG will drop the charges anyway.

If Trump loses, the court could proceed with this case.

[Ljube]

I think the only way the Supreme Court can stay out of politics is for them to sit on this appeal until after the election. If Trump wins, his AG will drop the charges anyway.

If Trump loses, the court could proceed with this case.

That is literally the exact opposite by every conceivable measure of the Court staying out of politics. That outcome would literally leave to a fundamental undermining of the rule of law in this country, which is why Republicans are so crossing their fingers for it.

But Badger, isn't a definition of a politically motivated case if one political party would prosecute it to the fullest extent of the law while the other political party would not even bring charges?

[Ljube]

Dammit, it sounds like it's over.  **** SCOTUS.
There's really no way the trial can happen before the election now.
There needs to be a least three months after the SCOTUS ruling before the trial can start.
And per Justice Department policy, the trial or a political candidate occur within two months before an election.

I don't think they will issue a ruling. Or if they do, it will be after the election, or it will be very narrow and pertaining to this case, probably confirming immunity.

[Ljube]

Really good thread from Steve Vladeck on what's probably happening with the SCOTUS immunity appeal:

https://twitter.com/steve_vladeck/status/1761070086863876421

1. A quick #thread on where things stand with former President Trump's application to #SCOTUS to keep the January 6 prosecution on hold.

First, we expect whatever the Court does to be a "miscellaneous order." Such an order can theoretically come at any time and without warning.

2. Second, although the justices *are* having a regularly scheduled Conference today, chances are that the Court has already made whatever decision it's going to make—and we're just waiting for the disposition.

So why has it taken 2 weeks so far? It's *impossible* to know, but:

3. My best guess is that one of two things has happened:

Possibility 1 is that the Court has voted to *deny* the stay, and some number of justices are writing separate opinions respecting that result (concurrences/ "statements"/dissents).

Two weeks is *not* that long for that.

4. Possibility 2 is that the Court has voted to go all the way to the merits—to issue a brief ruling by the full Court that *affirms* the D.C. Circuit's rejection of former President Trump's immunity.

Such a disposition would also take a little time to craft/get everyone behind.

5. If, instead, the Court was inclined to grant the stay and also expedite its consideration of the merits, hold argument, etc., there's *no* reason for this delay; that order could and should have come pretty quickly (and I wouldn't expect any separate writings respecting it).

6. And if the Court voted to grant a stay but *not* expedite, that might well have provoked dissents from one or more justices. That might explain the delay, but (1) those justices would have every reason to move quickly; & (2) I still think this outcome is very unlikely overall.

7. In other words, although there are several explanations for why it's taking the Court this long, the most likely ones are all *bad* for Trump. None of this is a guarantee, of course; one of the *problems* with the shadow docket is how much we're left to guess. But that's mine.

8. Anyway, I hope this thread is helpful. For longer explanations of all of this, see the issue of my #SCOTUS newsletter, "One First," that tried to cover all of the bases:

https://stevevladeck.substack.com/p/66-united-states-v-trump

/end

So it seems like the summary by Vladeck was entirely wrong.

I commented his tweet pointing out that they didn't expedite the last time they had that opportunity.

[Ljube]

Trump’s plan to use Judge Cannon to block Judge Chutkan and avoid trial

Former President Donald Trump’s lawyers see a major opportunity this week to use his criminal document mishandling case in Florida to create an impasse on his calendar for the two federal judges overseeing his major criminal cases.

Juggling his campaign and court calendar and playing his cases off one another is a key part of Trump’s legal strategy. The ultimate goal, his team has said openly, is to prevent Trump from being tried in federal court before voters cast their ballots in the 2024 general election.

A primary aim for Trump’s legal team, according to people familiar with the strategy, is to put the judge in DC overseeing the 2020 federal election obstruction case, Tanya Chutkan, in a position where she can’t start a trial before Election Day.

“Meaning, ice her,” said a person familiar with Trump’s trial schedule strategy. “Making it impossible for her to jam a trial down before the election, by things that are out of her control.”

https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/26/politics/trump-judge-cannon-chutkan-trial-plan/index.html

For all the talk of Trump's defense team being dumber than a bag of bricks from people here and elsewhere, I think they've actually done reasonably well in their efforts to delay all of Trump's trials but the weaker New York one.

It's the only strategy they have, because he's obviously guilty.

It's paying off. The Supreme Court may have killed the entire case, due to how far it's going to delay things now.

That renders the strategy with Cannon moot though. With DC and GA off the calendar I wonder if Trump wants to go to trial in FL so he can get acquitted before the election.

There’s no way Trump is getting acquited in the FL case.
He’s ironclad no-brainer open-and-shut guilty in that one.  He might get a hung jury just due to some rogue juror.  But you’re never going to get a jury to unanimously agree to just nullify for no legal reason.

OK maybe she dismissed them right at the end of the election for October surprise?

This is a great idea. If she really wants to help Trump, the best way to do it would be to schedule the trial for Aug 12 and then dismiss the case in late October. That would insulate Trump from the Jan 6 case.

[Ljube]

While I guess she can do that, with the goal of increasing his election chances, we should note the dismissal can be appealed and would likely be overturned and then the 11th circuit would surely assign the case to someone else at that point. So if Trump wins, it then comes down to whether a self pardon will be upheld by the courts or whether his DOJ can convince the new judge to drop the charges.

He will self-pardon for sure. You can bet on it.

[Ljube]

While I guess she can do that, with the goal of increasing his election chances, we should note the dismissal can be appealed and would likely be overturned and then the 11th circuit would surely assign the case to someone else at that point. So if Trump wins, it then comes down to whether a self pardon will be upheld by the courts or whether his DOJ can convince the new judge to drop the charges.

He will self-pardon for sure. You can bet on it.

Yes, though the cleanest way for a pardon would be to invoke the 25th Amendment for an hour, let the vice president acting as president sign a pardon declaration, and then resume presidential powers. I haven't read this somewhere yet, but that just makes sense to me.

Another brilliant idea.

[Ljube]

Very smart by the Roberts Court to wait to issue a Ruling on Immunity until a Guilty Verdict was reached in the NY Trail.

Yes, it's a different case here but I can almost guarantee you all now that former President Trump and future Presidents regardless of Party will get some form of "Immunity" so that these kind of flimsy bogus charges can't be brought in the future.

The inherent intelligence level of this post is a negative number.

Yet, it is still a possible outcome of this conviction.

[Ljube]

Very smart by the Roberts Court to wait to issue a Ruling on Immunity until a Guilty Verdict was reached in the NY Trail.

Yes, it's a different case here but I can almost guarantee you all now that former President Trump and future Presidents regardless of Party will get some form of "Immunity" so that these kind of flimsy bogus charges can't be brought in the future.

The inherent intelligence level of this post is a negative number.

Yet, it is still a possible outcome of this conviction.

Look, they are not going to give Trump Immunity on J6 (I don't think so) but it makes it at least resonable to give some form of Immunity to him & future Presidents so they can be protected from the kind of fishy & flimsy charges Bragg brought forward.

Only total immunity gives protection against this.
I don't think there were enough votes for the total immunity opinion, but after this, the chances are higher.

[Ljube]

Very smart by the Roberts Court to wait to issue a Ruling on Immunity until a Guilty Verdict was reached in the NY Trail.

Yes, it's a different case here but I can almost guarantee you all now that former President Trump and future Presidents regardless of Party will get some form of "Immunity" so that these kind of flimsy bogus charges can't be brought in the future.

The inherent intelligence level of this post is a negative number.

Yet, it is still a possible outcome of this conviction.

Look, they are not going to give Trump Immunity on J6 (I don't think so) but it makes it at least resonable to give some form of Immunity to him & future Presidents so they can be protected from the kind of fishy & flimsy charges Bragg brought forward.

Only total immunity gives protection against this.
I don't think there were enough votes for the total immunity opinion, but after this, the chances are higher.

Thomas and Alito will give Full Immunity. The Question is what ACB, Kavanaugh, Gorsuch and Roberts do. And ACB, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh may have second thoughts after seeing this Sham & Scam Trial.

Seeing Hakeem Jeffries, Nancy Pelosi, Schumer, Durbin & Kate Bedingfield squirm after SCOTUS hands down a Ruling in Trumps favor will be glorious to watch.

I agree that president's should be immune from prosecution for frivolous, non-violent offenses that lack a clear victim. On that ground, the Manhattan case should be thrown out without question. The other cases, while I do have problems with some, at least involve serious allegations of wrongdoing, some of which had the potential to cause great harm to at least one person (i.e. classified documents falling into the hands of malicious actors seeking to cause harm to the US)

He wasn’t President when he did that one.

Allow me to correct this.
Yes, Trump was President when he committed the crime he was convicted of.

If he is given absolute immunity, Merchan will vacate the conviction and enter a not guilty verdict.

[Ljube]

Very smart by the Roberts Court to wait to issue a Ruling on Immunity until a Guilty Verdict was reached in the NY Trail.

Yes, it's a different case here but I can almost guarantee you all now that former President Trump and future Presidents regardless of Party will get some form of "Immunity" so that these kind of flimsy bogus charges can't be brought in the future.

The inherent intelligence level of this post is a negative number.

Yet, it is still a possible outcome of this conviction.

Look, they are not going to give Trump Immunity on J6 (I don't think so) but it makes it at least resonable to give some form of Immunity to him & future Presidents so they can be protected from the kind of fishy & flimsy charges Bragg brought forward.

Only total immunity gives protection against this.
I don't think there were enough votes for the total immunity opinion, but after this, the chances are higher.

Thomas and Alito will give Full Immunity. The Question is what ACB, Kavanaugh, Gorsuch and Roberts do. And ACB, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh may have second thoughts after seeing this Sham & Scam Trial.

Seeing Hakeem Jeffries, Nancy Pelosi, Schumer, Durbin & Kate Bedingfield squirm after SCOTUS hands down a Ruling in Trumps favor will be glorious to watch.

I agree that president's should be immune from prosecution for frivolous, non-violent offenses that lack a clear victim. On that ground, the Manhattan case should be thrown out without question. The other cases, while I do have problems with some, at least involve serious allegations of wrongdoing, some of which had the potential to cause great harm to at least one person (i.e. classified documents falling into the hands of malicious actors seeking to cause harm to the US)

He wasn’t President when he did that one.

Allow me to correct this.
Yes, Trump was President when he committed the crime he was convicted of.

If he is given absolute immunity, Merchan will vacate the conviction and enter a not guilty verdict.

There is no possibility that SCOTUS will decide that presidents have absolute immunity; if they did, it would make the President in effect an absolute dictator for the duration of his term.  For example, Biden could then immediately order Trump rounded up and executed, and face zero legal consequences for it.

I expect they will rule that presidents have a limited immunity covering actions taken within the scope of their presidential duties.  Under no circumstances can Trump's actions in this case be considered within that scope, regardless of whether it happened during his term in office.

Look, I expected the same thing. Immune for official acts, not immune for anything else.
But this political prosecution might change the calculus.