News

Trump seeks immunity from Supreme Court for alleged crimes International

Donald Trump returns to the Supreme Court. The man who appoints one-third of the nine justices at the top of the U.S. judicial system has appeared time and time again on the court’s agenda this year. Lawyers for the former president notified Monday that they will appeal a Washington appeals court ruling that stripped him of immunity for crimes he may have committed while serving as a White House tenant. Whether the judge accepts or rejects the appeal, Trump will at least buy time. He has managed to delay the process and so far avoid being in the dock in the middle of a Republican primary. Now, he’s asking that the case remain paralyzed while he lays out some of his arguments for an appeal: “Without criminal immunity, the presidency as we know it would cease to exist.”

Trump has notified that he will formally appeal the decision to the Supreme Court and requested that the proceedings continue to be halted in the meantime. This will allow him to continue to delay the investigation and postpone the oral trial. “A months-long criminal trial against President Trump in the middle of an election season would fundamentally undermine the ability of President Trump’s presidential opponent, President Biden,” attorneys for the former president said in the introduction to their brief. Therefore, the D.C. Circuit’s order (denying his immunity and ordering him to stand trial) could immediately cause irreparable harm to the First Amendment interests of President Trump and the tens of millions of American voters who “have the right to Hear President Trump’s campaign message while they decide how to vote in November,” they added.

The discussion of immunity refers to a case in Washington in which the former president is accused of trying to change the outcome of the 2020 election to stay in power, which he lost to Joe Biden. However, the judge’s principle could be extended to all four of the 91 alleged crimes against him. Also on Monday, Trump faced proceedings in a Florida court that is dealing with allegations that he withheld secret documents after leaving the White House.

Trump’s defense raised two issues in its appeal to the Supreme Court. On the one hand, the president is immune from criminal penalties for acts committed in the direct exercise of his authority, even after leaving the White House. On the other hand, given that Trump has been impeached, is his right not to be tried twice on the same facts violated? (Impeach) In Congress. A majority of senators then found him guilty, but fell short of the two-thirds majority needed for conviction.

Trump’s argument is that if he were tried, the taps would be turned on and “the threat of future criminal charges from a politically opposed administration would overshadow all official actions of a future president, especially the most politically controversial decisions.” “The president ‘s political opponents will attempt to influence and control his decisions through effective blackmail or blackmail, and threaten that future hostile governments will impeach him for unjustifiable acts of impeachment. This threat will hang like a millstone on every around the neck of a future president, distorting his decision-making, undermining his independence, and clouding his ability to ‘fearlessly and impartially discharge’ the responsibilities of his office,” they added. Long form writing.

kill opponent

Join EL PAÍS to follow all the news and read without limits.

subscription

Trump took his extreme argument to the Supreme Court that a president or former president can only be tried in court if he has been previously convicted in a political process (Impeach) by Congress. Under this near-absolute immunity, Trump’s defense attorneys argued that he could not even be tried for ordering Special Forces commandos to assassinate his political opponents, including those who planned to vote for Trump. Impeach? ). It’s hard to imagine the Supreme Court, despite a majority of six conservative and three progressive justices, adopting such reasoning, but even as the court rejects the appeal, Trump continues to buy time.

The judge only gave Trump until Monday to appeal to the Supreme Court before the case can be reopened. So Trump’s defense had two options: appeal to the full Court of Appeals but let the case continue, or go to the Supreme Court and remain paralyzed, which is what it did. Ordinarily, appeals would not paralyze the handling of a case, but they did in this case, because at stake is the very nature of whether the former president can be indicted.

Both the judge handling the case and the appeals court strongly rejected the former president’s immunity. “For the purposes of this criminal case, former President Trump has become a Trump Citizen and has all the defenses of any other criminal defendant. But any executive immunity that would have protected him while he was president no longer protects him immune from this charge,” the 57-page ruling said in its introduction. “It would be a surprising paradox that the President has the ultimate constitutional duty to ensure faithful observance of the laws if he is the only office capable of challenging these laws with impunity,” the justices said in their decision. “We cannot accept that the Office of the President will forever place its former occupants above the law,” they said in another sentence.

In a charge sheet in the case that marks Trump’s third indictment, special counsel Jack Smith charges him with four crimes: conspiracy to defraud the United States government, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, and obstructing or attempting to obstruct a proceeding. . Violation of civil rights.

Judge Tanya Chutkan originally scheduled the trial to begin on March 4, but it has been postponed indefinitely. That leaves a clear trail on his first charge of making false business payments to cover up scandals surrounding the 2016 presidential campaign (one of which was against porn actress Stormy Daniels to suppress an alleged extramarital affair) .

The case was initially scheduled to be heard in New York state court for five weeks starting on March 25, 2024. Chutkan has spoken to the New York judge, warning him that a delay may be needed if the Washington trial begins, but that is not the case for a longer period.

Follow all international news Facebook and Xor in our weekly newsletter.



Source link

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *