Great analysis. Thank you for this Substack! I agree they will pick one of the two remand paths. I’ll put in my plug for your Jack podcast here 🙂Been listening since day 1 and you and Andy McCabe do an excellent job of just cutting through the fog and explaining what’s going on in clear and concise terms. Especially helpful for non-lawyers but good summaries for we attorneys too. Very well done!
It still boggles my mind that we are even debating this point. Regardless of whether it's an "official" or "private" act, if you break the law, you're subject to prosecution. Only the Trumpists would advance an argument otherwise.
Watching the scotus hearing today was so revealing. The resolution on immunity likely will be postponed or very limited. You’re so right about Judge Alito. He’s a definite roadblock to reasonable a conclusion! Thomas is a roadblock to sanity, along with his dear wife, Ginny!
Thank you for your analysis, AG. I would love to upgrade because it is "worth it to me," but I don't have the $. I support your great work by sharing it!!
Thank you for breaking this down for us, Allison. As usual, your calm, reasonable voice and explanation have peeled me off the ceiling! Delay, delay. Vote!
If it is remanded back to Chutkan to determine private vs official acts, I like Andrew Weissman's idea of holding a hearing with witnesses to explore all the acts. It would serve a similar purpose to a trial to get the facts out in front of the public pre-election. Not a lawyer, but it seems the potential worst case scenario would be sending it back to the Circuit Court of Appeals to develop something. Not sure they can hold hearings with witnesses.
Thank you so much for moving over to substack! Would you consider making the post have the audio playback option? Love all the pods, y'all are brilliant
Dearest Sleepless sleuth, Thank you so much for this Substack, Thank you for telling everyone about it too. You and all your co-host keep me up to date and as optimistic as you can. I'm going to miss the Post community. Thank you for giving me a place to be.
I know there has been a lot of doom and gloom over SCOTUS right now but in cases like this I often like to remember Newtons law of equal and opposite reactions. If SCOTUS were to rule that Trump has blanket immunity not only would they be irrevocably destroying their credibility for a generation but they also would be handing Biden and Dems the best argument for SCOTUS reform they could hope to ask for. If you think the backlash over Roe was bad the blowback they could face for ripping up and rewriting the constitution to protect Trump will be even worse. I think many of the doomers right now have not considered just how badly this move could end up blowing up in Trump and the conservative justices depending on how they rule. I have heard many of the conservative SCOTUS members have been complaining about how people perceive them well they are in for a very rude awakening now.
Thoughtful comment, Gabe Hoffman. But MAGATS justices care only to spout off for posterity so they’ll come up with “novel reasoning” they deem impressive.
The division between official and private acts seems so important; yet, even a dunce of a POTUS can think of ways to stage manage any private interest into an official one.
Drumpf was too self-confident and too careless to cleanly separate private from public in his 2020 attempt to jig the Georgia outcome. And the distinction didn’t seem as important in 2020. If returned as POTUS in 2024, he’ll be damn careful to disguise his private interests as public acts. And he’ll be untouchable on standards set by this SCOTUS.
Great analysis. Thank you for this Substack! I agree they will pick one of the two remand paths. I’ll put in my plug for your Jack podcast here 🙂Been listening since day 1 and you and Andy McCabe do an excellent job of just cutting through the fog and explaining what’s going on in clear and concise terms. Especially helpful for non-lawyers but good summaries for we attorneys too. Very well done!
It still boggles my mind that we are even debating this point. Regardless of whether it's an "official" or "private" act, if you break the law, you're subject to prosecution. Only the Trumpists would advance an argument otherwise.
Watching the scotus hearing today was so revealing. The resolution on immunity likely will be postponed or very limited. You’re so right about Judge Alito. He’s a definite roadblock to reasonable a conclusion! Thomas is a roadblock to sanity, along with his dear wife, Ginny!
It’s just disheartening listening to these partisan, corrupt unethical scoundrels. Specifically, Thomas. Alito, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh.
They constantly minimized Jan. 6 and Trump’s crimes by being more concerned for the “future.”
There certainly was speed with Bush-Gore and Trump being taken off a ballot. America deserves better than tyrants.
Pretty sure AG removes this troll idiot lickety split.
Alito daring to bring Seal Team 6 in was obscenely irrelevant and absolutely despicable.
Been told Seal Team 6 gone. Heard they are placing old sneaky petes on standby
Once again, Gorsuch outshone the others today when it comes to being a condescending POS. He's intolerable.
Thank you for your analysis, AG. I would love to upgrade because it is "worth it to me," but I don't have the $. I support your great work by sharing it!!
Awesome summation - thank you!
Thank you for breaking this down for us, Allison. As usual, your calm, reasonable voice and explanation have peeled me off the ceiling! Delay, delay. Vote!
If it is remanded back to Chutkan to determine private vs official acts, I like Andrew Weissman's idea of holding a hearing with witnesses to explore all the acts. It would serve a similar purpose to a trial to get the facts out in front of the public pre-election. Not a lawyer, but it seems the potential worst case scenario would be sending it back to the Circuit Court of Appeals to develop something. Not sure they can hold hearings with witnesses.
Appellate courts don’t hear evidence or witnesses. Their role is to decide whether there was an error of law in the trial case.
Thank you so much for moving over to substack! Would you consider making the post have the audio playback option? Love all the pods, y'all are brilliant
Glad you’re here on Substack - we’re here for the long form!
Dearest Sleepless sleuth, Thank you so much for this Substack, Thank you for telling everyone about it too. You and all your co-host keep me up to date and as optimistic as you can. I'm going to miss the Post community. Thank you for giving me a place to be.
Excellent
Thank you for this great summary.
I know there has been a lot of doom and gloom over SCOTUS right now but in cases like this I often like to remember Newtons law of equal and opposite reactions. If SCOTUS were to rule that Trump has blanket immunity not only would they be irrevocably destroying their credibility for a generation but they also would be handing Biden and Dems the best argument for SCOTUS reform they could hope to ask for. If you think the backlash over Roe was bad the blowback they could face for ripping up and rewriting the constitution to protect Trump will be even worse. I think many of the doomers right now have not considered just how badly this move could end up blowing up in Trump and the conservative justices depending on how they rule. I have heard many of the conservative SCOTUS members have been complaining about how people perceive them well they are in for a very rude awakening now.
Thoughtful comment, Gabe Hoffman. But MAGATS justices care only to spout off for posterity so they’ll come up with “novel reasoning” they deem impressive.
The division between official and private acts seems so important; yet, even a dunce of a POTUS can think of ways to stage manage any private interest into an official one.
Drumpf was too self-confident and too careless to cleanly separate private from public in his 2020 attempt to jig the Georgia outcome. And the distinction didn’t seem as important in 2020. If returned as POTUS in 2024, he’ll be damn careful to disguise his private interests as public acts. And he’ll be untouchable on standards set by this SCOTUS.