Trump asks Supreme Court to block New York hush money sentencing
Last edited Wed Jan 8, 2025, 09:05 AM - Edit history (1)
Source: NBC News
Jan. 8, 2025, 8:23 AM EST / Updated Jan. 8, 2025, 8:32 AM EST
President-elect Donald Trump on Wednesday asked the Supreme Court to block criminal proceedings in his hush money case in New York, with a sentencing hearing scheduled for Friday.
The court has asked New York prosecutors to respond to Trump's request by Thursday morning, giving the justices time to act before the sentencing proceeding.
"This Court should enter an immediate stay of further proceedings in the New York trial court to prevent grave injustice and harm to the institution of the Presidency and the operations of the federal government," Trump's lawyers wrote in the new filing. They argue that the case should not go forward because Trump was protected by presidential immunity, as recognized by the Supreme Court earlier this year.
"The Supreme Courts historic decision on Immunity, the Constitution, and established legal precedent mandate that this meritless hoax be immediately dismissed," Trump spokesman Steven Cheung said in a statement.
Read more: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-asks-supreme-court-block-new-york-hush-money-sentencing-rcna186751
It's a STATE issue and if the SCOTUS wants to selectively remove "states rights" then...
Article updated.
Original article -
President-elect Donald Trump on Wednesday asked the Supreme Court to block criminal proceedings in his hush money case in New York, with a sentencing hearing scheduled for Friday.
The court has asked New York prosecutors to respond to Trump's request by Thursday morning, giving the justices time to act before the sentencing proceeding.
"This Court should enter an immediate stay of further proceedings in the New York trial court to prevent grave injustice and harm to the institution of the Presidency and the operations of the federal government," Trump's lawyers wrote in the new filing.
They argue that the case should not go forward because Trump, who was president at the time of the alleged offenses, was protected by presidential immunity, as recognized by the Supreme Court earlier this year. On Tuesday, a New York appeals court judge declined to block the sentencing.
Marthe48
(19,620 posts)Grave injustice and harm? That ship has sailed.
bucolic_frolic
(47,958 posts)SCOTUS is being asked to expand its immunity ruling. This is total dictatorship.
endgenocide
(137 posts)Appeals to the supreme court, presidential transition, planning wars against Canada, Greenland and the panama canal. When does he find some "me time"?
Walleye
(36,897 posts)So hes filling the time with megalomania
Cattledog
(6,434 posts)But with this court you never know.
BoRaGard
(3,490 posts)johnnyfins
(1,554 posts)It has been completely captured, and the chief justice has ZERO room to complain about outside forces putting pressure on the court or to grandstand about SCOTUS' so-called integrity.
endgenocide
(137 posts)I would say the odds of them interferes on diaper don's behalf are 99.74 to 1!
orangecrush
(22,306 posts)Already is.
underpants
(187,775 posts)Baitball Blogger
(48,722 posts)He's asking for their political endorsement.
Hope22
(3,278 posts)If the SC intervenes then all hope is lost. In which case I will have to beg EarlG to let me change my name so people wont chide me for my hopelessness! 🫠
cstanleytech
(27,246 posts)ScratchCat
(2,510 posts)Than "The SCOTUS does not have jurisdiction in a State criminal case" and they better say it now. Ignore the request and sentence him. There is no recourse.
Kid Berwyn
(18,639 posts)After Greenland and Panama and wherever Putin wants.
republianmushroom
(18,459 posts)the results of your actions.
Attilatheblond
(4,860 posts)They can move mighty fast when the oligarchs want them to. Foot dragging is S.O.P. when it involves actual rights of regular people.
3825-87867
(1,175 posts)is just like Aileen Cannon...they just don't care what the majority of the people want nor even written law. Let's find a way to reinterpret all laws except..the 2nd Amendment! (and abortion)
emulatorloo
(45,654 posts)To hell with Trump, to hell w his partners-in-crime on the SCOTUS.
DallasNE
(7,620 posts)Alito says he "did not discuss" this issue with Trump. It depends on the meaning of "discuss". That leaves open the issue being brought up indirectly as a hypothetical.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/alito-spoke-with-trump-before-president-elect-asked-supreme-court-to-delay-his-sentencing/ar-BB1r7o3u?ocid=msedgntp&pc=HCTS&cvid=b453856ba3f54f09bb0ac6fe6b3b5eb2&ei=14
Oh, I somewhat predicted Alito would get involved in a Post to Malaise.
https://democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=19883202