If accepted, the case will be the first time the high court has a say in one of Trump’s quartet of indictments.

The Supreme Court almost immediately granted Special Counsel Jack Smith’s Monday request for expedited consideration—a highly unusual rapid response that highlights the historic nature of the case.

Smith wants the court to weigh in on the question of whether former president Donald Trump has absolute presidential immunity for crimes he’s accused of carrying out while in the White House.

In its response, the high court ordered Trump’s attorneys to file a reply to Smith’s petition by next Wednesday, Dec. 20 at 4 p.m. ET.

The Supreme Court’s Monday decision does not mean it will take up the case—it simply means the nine-judge panel will make that decision on a much faster timeline than it normally would.

  • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world
    29·
    11 months ago

    …they’d be giving Biden free reign to do literally whatever he wants

    I like your premise, but I think conservatives know that normal people don’t use the Oval Office to commit crimes. That’s strictly conservative behavior. Thus, a ruling for Trump would effectively be a ruling to protect conservative presidents.

    • circuscritic@lemmy.ca
      182·
      11 months ago

      The White House has ALWAYS been used to commit crimes, it’s part of the job description. The difference is the TYPES of crimes Trump committed.

      Enabling, or commiting, mass murder is NOT something the courts can come down on POTUS for, as it’s part of the load bearing structure of our empire, no matter how illegal or immoral.

      Paying off pornstars and publicly refusing to return stolen classified national security documents, is so far outside the “norms” of “acceptable” Executive Branch criminal activity that their prosecution doesn’t risk setting a precedent of holding future Presidents accountable for the myriad of crimes they will ALL commit i.e. war crimes.

      • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world
        64·
        11 months ago

        The White House has ALWAYS been used to commit crimes

        In the last 100 years, I think conservative presidents are more widely recognized for their crimes in office. Nixon, Bush Sr., Bush Jr., Trump.

        I don’t really consider the Clinton BJ scandal to rise to the label of “criminal behavior” the way killing people or destroying foreign governments to benefit corporations does. But that is where the left and the right seem to differ on what behaviors should be most frowned upon. I think the left and right just value human lives differently.

        • circuscritic@lemmy.ca
          41·
          11 months ago

          I throught that my specific and intentional language around violence and death made it clear that I wasn’t talking about sex scandals.

          Do you really think that only Republican administrations advance the goals of American empire and neo-colonialism? If so, then I hope one day you start reading books.

          But, if you’re not that naive and do understand that Presidents of both parties advance those goals, I’d ask you how you think empires are built, maintained, or expanded?