The former president is now highly unlikely to stand trial in the Justice Department’s election interference case before November

The Supreme Court handed Donald Trump a massive victory on Wednesday by agreeing to rule on whether he is immune from prosecution for acts committed while he was president. The court will hear arguments on April 22 and won’t hand down a decision until June — which means it’s unlikely a trial in the Justice Department’s election interference case will commence before the election. If Trump wins the election, he’ll of course appoint an attorney general who will toss the case, regardless of how the Supreme Court rules this summer.

By Wednesday night, Trumpland was celebrating.

“Literally popping champagne right now,” a lawyer close to Donald Trump told Rolling Stone late on Wednesday.

  • Telorand@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    No he can’t. The Special Monitor overseeing his assets and watching his books has the authority to start seizing assets until he’s satisfied the monetary requirements to appeal, and she can do that right now. And, there’s interest running on the meter until he does.

    He’s gonna pay whether he likes it or not.

    • Tyfud@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Yes he can. Unfortunately. We all get to watch this birth of a dictator unfold in slow motion if Trump wins.

      • Telorand@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        How? Given the powers that the Special Monitor has, how could he possibly avoid paying?

        RNC certainly doesn’t seem like a likely option right now, and nobody else has ponied up the money.

          • Telorand@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            I always figured the Jan 6 ones were a long shot, but these other two cases are done. He’s going to have to pay, and he can’t get an appeal unless he pays, thanks to NY law.

            That’s why it’s different from the federal ones.

            ETA: and he can’t just not pay, because the Special Monitor has a court-ordered obligation to ensure he pays his court debts. She’ll just seize his assets, which she has the power to do.

              • Telorand@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                It is different, because he’s not the one with the power over his finances. Having a court-appointed Special Monitor who oversees every financial transaction is not remotely the same as just expecting him to pay out of common decency (which he doesn’t have). Lack of evidence is not evidence of lack.

                If he becomes dictator, of course it won’t matter, but that’s a future possibility, not a current reality.

                  • Telorand@reddthat.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    That’s called a slippery slope fallacy. This reduction of the bond fucking sucks, but he has 10 days to pay it (and we’ll see if he does), and that doesn’t ultimately mean he’s off the hook.

                    I get your cynicism, but that does not justify your position that he’s going to ultimately escape, unless you are a legal expert and know more than the other legal experts.

                    It’s possible (though not likely) the final amount will be reduced by the appellate court, but Judge Engoron’s behavior and judgement was above board. Trump will not escape unscathed, regardless.

                    This case isn’t some goofy reading of the Constitution to justify why churches can revive segregation. It’s a standard business fraud case, and the facts speak for themselves.

      • Telorand@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        I don’t know what she has seized. But that doesn’t mean she hasn’t or won’t. It just means we don’t know.

        But it doesn’t matter what Trump has said publicly, because he’s obligated to pay, and it’s not just up to him or his accountants whether he does.

        • blazera@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          You’re operating under the reasonable logic of how this is supposed to work. But nothings gone how it’s supposed to work for Trump. He’s had a decade of very public crime and been found guilty in several different ways, but has so far not had any consequences enforced. guilty of rape, tax fraud, defamation, campaign finance violations, and bribery, and so far not a penny, much less jail time.

          • Telorand@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            I would argue that the two NY cases have gone exactly as you’d expect. Nothing has happened in them that was particularly unusual. Typical rape case + defamation and a corporate fraud case. All already with judgments.

            And as far as collections go, it’s not like buying groceries. He doesn’t have to pay the full amount all at once (and probably can’t). He does have to front the money if he wants to appeal, though, and all he’s done is file for one. They won’t take it up until he’s paid up.

              • Telorand@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                Yes. The facts and conduct of the trial were typical, ordinary. I was not saying that rape is typical.

                  • Telorand@reddthat.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    10 months ago

                    How many rape cases have you heard of that get special, one-time grace periods to revisit 30 years later?

                    ETA: this was not a criminal rape trial, it was a civil one. Jail time was never an option.

    • guacupado@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      and she can do that right now.

      If she hasn’t, then she won’t. We all know what could and should happen, and we all know none of it has.