The ruling is significant not only for its stark repudiation of Trump’s novel immunity claims but also because it breathes life back into a landmark prosecution that had been effectively frozen for weeks as the court considered the appeal.

Yet the one-month gap between when the court heard arguments and issued its ruling has already created uncertainty about the timing of a trial in a calendar-jammed election year, with the judge overseeing the case last week canceling the initial March 4 date.

Trump’s team vowed to appeal, which could postpones the case by weeks or months — particularly if the Supreme Court agrees to take it up. The judges gave Trump a week to ask the Supreme Court to get involved.

    • bedrooms@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      55
      ·
      5 months ago

      It’s stupid. Imagine the presidential immunity were a thing: POTUS could hold a press conference, rape a reporter in front of cameras, kill her husband at the same time, and nobody would be allowed to stop it.

        • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          5 months ago

          It would be kinda hilarious if the Supreme Court took up the case and Biden showed up to watch the hearing carrying a baseball bat.

      • neptune@dmv.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        5 months ago

        I mean as long as he accused the couple of voting illegally or something, sure, yes.

      • orbitz@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        5 months ago

        No, no, couldn’t congress impeach and convict him during the ordeal and then they’d be good to charge him with a crime? Only the one he was committing once the vote was tallied of course, after the senator filibustering the vote was pressured, and it was on the agenda. It seems like such a simple thing to do unless the President gave himself a pardon in advance of course.

        The whole idea is completely preposterous, that anyone should have that sort of immunity, to the point that justices should have been writing their decision as soon as the idea was brought up and knew it could land in their court.

        • bluewing@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          They don’t need to write anything if they wish stay true to the constitution and justice. All they need to do is simply say, “Nope we good Fam, we ain’t hearing shit about this.” And that lets the Appeals Court stand.

        • ouRKaoS@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          Congress couldn’t do shit because anyone voting to impeach the president would be a “political opponent” and would get murderized