Denied his request for immunity from prosecution at the District Court by Judge Tania Chutkan, and by a three judge panel of the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, Donald Trump has asked the Supreme Court to stay the Circuit court's order referring the case back to District Judge Tania Chutkan in Washington, D.C. The upcoming trial is for his attempt to stall and avoid the transfer of power after his November 2,000 defeat at the polls.
The decisions below are:
United States District Court (D.D.C.):
• United States v. Trump, No. 23-cr-257 (Dec. 1, 2023)
United States Court of Appeals (D.C. Cir.):
• United States v. Trump, No. 23-3190 (opinion issued Dec. 8, 2023)
• United States v. Trump, No. 23-3228 (opinion issued Feb. 6, 2024)
According to Trump's lawyers - in their Application to the Supreme Court for a stay of the D.C.Circuit's Mandate regarding the January 6 charges against Donald Trump arising from the events of January 6, 2021 the former President's lawyers framed the issues this way:
The questions presented are:
I. Whether the doctrine of absolute presidential immunity includes immunity from criminal prosecution for a President’s official acts, i.e., those performed within the “‘outer perimeter’ of his official responsibility.” Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731, 756 (1982) (quoting Barr v. Matteo, 360 U.S. 564, 575 (1959)).
II. Whether the Impeachment Judgment Clause, U.S. CONST. art. I, § 3, cl. 7, and principles of double jeopardy foreclose the criminal prosecution of a President who has been impeached and acquitted by the U.S. Senate for the same and/or closely related conduct that underlies the criminal charges.
In their stunningly bold submission the Trump lawyers wrote:
INTRODUCTION
This application is “déjà vu all over again.” Yogi Berra Museum & Learning Center, “Yogi-isms.” Two months ago, after the District Court denied President Trump’s claim of Presidential immunity in this criminal case, the Special Counsel filed a petition for certiorari before judgment asking this Court to undertake an extraordinary departure from ordinary appellate procedures and decide the vital and historic question of Presidential immunity on a hyper-accelerated basis. This Court correctly chose to follow standard judicial process and declined to do so. Now, at the Special Counsel’s urging, a panel of the D.C. Circuit has, in an extraordinarily fast manner, issued a decision on President Trump’s claim of immunity and ordered the mandate returned to the District Court to proceed with President Trump’s criminal trial in four business days, unless this Court intervenes (as it should). App’x 58A.
This Court should stay the D.C. Circuit’s mandate to forestall, once again, an unprecedented and unacceptable departure from ordinary appellate procedures and allow President Trump’s claim of immunity to be decided in the ordinary course of justice.
The reasons to do so are compelling. President Trump’s claim that Presidents have absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for their official acts presents a novel, complex, and momentous question that warrants careful consideration on appeal. The panel opinion below, like the district court, concludes that Presidential immunity from prosecution for official acts does not exist at all. This is a stunning breach of precedent and historical norms. In 234 years of American history, no President was ever prosecuted for his official acts. Nor should they be.
No comments:
Post a Comment