Shame on You Supreme Court Justices 2

Before beginning this post, I reread the one I composed almost a month ago. In that one I chastised the Justices for their apparent bias against allowing Colorado to remove Trump from their primary ballot. It wasn't just this obvious bias that concerned me but what I called their ivory tower approach to the oral questioning, and the absurdity of their seemingly offhand dismissal of the actual basis for Colorado's Supreme Court decision, that Trump engaged in insurrection. 

It can certainly be debated whether Trump's debunked claims that the 2020 election was stolen, his pressure campaign to convince certain state officials to alter or misreport vote totals and to create "alternate" slates of electors, not to mention his relentless attacks on Mike Pence to "do the right thing", and his apparent glee as the rioters attacked the Capitol building, rise to the level of insurrection, but the fact that all those things occurred (and more), should at least have been a part of the debate as to whether Colorado, or Maine, after digesting these facts, had the right to disqualify Trump. 

To completely disregard this aspect of the decision, seems to indicate that either the Justices are purposefully ignoring it, or have decided not to take responsibility (as the final judicial word on any legal matter), for upholding the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. 

https://wurdsfromtheburbs.blogspot.com/2024/02/shame-on-you-supreme-court-justices.html

Now, as a result of their decision to rule on the extent of presidential immunity as being claimed by the ex-president, it seems that ignoring Trump's actions isn't the case anymore, they are actually going to discuss whether he can actually do whatever he wants as president along as his party doesn't impeach him. Hard to believe I would ever look upon Nixon with a bit of wistfulness, as even he knew that his own party might impeach him for his actions, and that he wasn't above the law, while Trump has always acted as if laws are for everyone else, while his grip on the GOP is impenetrable.

This whole situation is the perfect storm of inconceivable actions which the founders could have never predicted. A wanna be dictator with an iron grip on his party along with a Supreme Court more worried about technical legal issues than the fight to save our democracy.

As someone far more insightful that I have said, most great nations fall from within.

What galls me is not just that SCOTUS chose to elucidate their opinion on presidential immunity (an amazing fact in itself, that after 250 years of presidents, it is only now, with Trump, that the issue has to be adjudicated), but that they put a stay on the federal trial to determine Trump's responsibility for January 6th. They certainly could have allowed the trial to move forward, knowing that even if they didn't take oral arguments until late April (and why so much delay for that process is another bad omen), and didn't decide until late May or early June, the trial would still be in progress, since they knew that the judge in the case had already promised over two months to the Trump team to prepare for the trial. Now, if they don't issue their decision until late May or early June, the trial can't begin until late summer. 

As I have heard a number of times, it appears that the Justices have given Trump a de facto escape from accountability, both because of the prep time I mentioned above, and also because of the tradition of the DOJ not to get involved in a judicial case involving a presidential election within 60 days of that election. Two months prior to November is September which is damned close to the possible trial start date of an early June SCOTUS decision plus that seventy plus days for trial prep.

Is this a clear case of SCOTUS prejudice for a political candidate who either actually nominated them or shares their ideology? 

While I can't possibly know the answer to that question, I can speculate that Judge Thomas, whose wife actively lobbied people in Trump's inner circle to do whatever it took to keep him in power, is biased. I also have no doubt that Alito was instrumental in pushing for the Supreme Court to take this case. 

As for the three justices that Trump appointed, I would wager that at least two of them were down with ruling on presidential immunity, especially Kavanaugh, who has a history of supporting extensive presidential powers. I am not sure if I prefer to find out that Chief Justice Roberts was in on the push for taking the case because if he wasn't that leaves us with the dangerous realization that all three of Trump's appointments appear to be on his side, or as Trump would put it, are doing the "right thing".  

Certainly it will be interesting to see if there is some kind of details released on how SCOTUS determined to hear this case. Was there a unanimous decision to hear the case, but some dissent as to putting the election interference trial on hold? Did the three liberal justices find themselves outnumbered by the six conservative justices on both the question to take the case and the decision to grant the stay to delay the trial? Remember, allegedly, a stay is generally only issued if there is a reasonable chance that the requesting party, in this case Trump, has a reasonable chance to win the case. 

Really? There are justices on the Supreme Court of the United States of America that believe that a president of the United States of America has immunity to do whatever he wants while president? There are enough justices that actually believe that the founders who fought for independence from the dictates of the King of England, would be down for an American King?

We have already seen some dissent when it came to the Colorado decision, as the three liberal justices were joined by Justice Coney Barrett in disagreeing with the extent of the majority when they seemed to rewrite the 14th Amendment with their decision that indicated that states can only get involved in state elections when using the insurrectionist clause, despite the fact that the original intent of the amendment was to keep those who fought against the Union out of the Untied States Congress. 

So again I say, shame on you Supreme Court Justices! Perhaps you believe that you shouldn't have a hand in presidential elections which is why you negated Colorado's decision. Unfortunately, you effectively have changed the course of the November election by not allowing the Court of Appeals 3-0 decision to stand, by not allowing the election interference trial to continue while you debated the extent of presidential immunity, and by scheduling oral arguments two months in the future, rather than in a much more aggressive expedited fashion. 

What is truly mind boggling, is that this Supreme Court thinks that should Trump win in November, they might be a backstop for some of his more outrageous policies, as if he will follow the law as they rule. We already see the Republican Governor of Texas thumbing his nose at their decision that only the federal government has authority concerning immigration, already see multiple GOP Congressmen and Governors advising Abbott to ignore that ruling. Do they really think that Trump will care what they say should they rule against one of his executive decisions, do they really believe his MAGA supporters will side with them or Trump?

While Biden engages with NATO countries leaders, Trump hosts the dictator from Hungary at his Florida home. The authoritarian playbook is open and in progress, yet the Justices think Trump will obey any ruling they make with which he disagrees. Again, ivory tower thinking.

A Trump victory in November, that can be blamed, even in part, because the American electorate is denied access to the details of how Trump and his team tried to negate the votes of over 80 million Americans, will add the Supreme Court Justices to the list of enablers which includes those who deny what they saw on TV on January 6th, refuse to evaluate the reams of evidence placing Trump at the head of a conspiracy to thwart the peaceful transfer of power, and ignore all the signs that Trump does not care about democracy or America, never has, never will.