Trump Says Supreme Court Should Bail Him Out of Criminal Conviction

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trump-supreme-court-intervene-hush-money-conviction-1235031240/

42 comments

  1. ***From Rolling Stone’s Nikki McCann Ramirez:***

    Donald Trump says he wants the Supreme Court to intervene in his upcoming sentencing on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records.

    “The ‘Sentencing’ for not having done anything wrong will be, conveniently for the Fascists, 4 days before the Republican National Convention,” Trump wrote Sunday night on Truth Social, complaining that Judge Juan Merchan was an “‘Acting’ Local Judge, appointed by the Democrats, who is HIGHLY CONFLICTED” to “make a decision which will determine the future of our Nation.”

    “The United States Supreme Court MUST DECIDE!” Trump added in an appeal to the nation’s highest court.

    Trump is expected to appeal the verdict, but it would first need to make it through the criminal appeals process in New York before it could be elevated to the Supreme Court.

    Read more: [https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trump-supreme-court-intervene-hush-money-conviction-1235031240/](https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trump-supreme-court-intervene-hush-money-conviction-1235031240/)

  3. It was a jury trial. The SCOTUS can’t overrule facts found by the jury. Case closed.

  4. It’s a New York case and the NY Supreme Court would be the court it ends up in, not the Supreme Court.

  5. Every time republicans threaten to run to the supreme court I can’t help but picture a crying toddler screaming “mommy!!!”

    Yea run to mommy and see if she’ll save you.

  6. The Supreme Court can only grant certiorari to Federal court cases. In order for Trump to appeal his State convictions in Federal court, he will need to show that his civil rights were violated.

    Was it illegal search and seizure? Is this cruel and unusual punishment? Has he been forced to quarter Redcoats in his home? What?

    He has no grounds for Federal appeal.

  7. Showing, once again, that drumpfuck has no idea how the court system in this country works.

  8. Funny. If I remember correctly, states’ rights is one of those big-ticket super important things for Republicans. This conviction was in a state court, for a state crime. So, sure seems like SCOTUS stepping in here would be one of those big bad federal government overreach things that they hate so much. Or maybe they’re just hypocrites who think the law is just one more arbitrary mechanism that exists for their sole benefit.

  9. Trump doesn’t have any cohesive legal theory other than “I should never face consequences for anything.”

  10. With the quality of lawyers he is left with, they will file it improperly and cost him the appeal.

  12. >In Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee, 14 U.S. 304 (1816), and Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. 264 (1821), **the Supreme Court held that the Supremacy Clause and the judicial power granted in Article III give the Supreme Court the ultimate power to review state court decisions involving issues arising under the Constitution and laws of the United States. Therefore, the Supreme Court has the final say in matters involving federal law, including constitutional interpretation, and can overrule decisions by state courts.**

    >In McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 316 (1819), the Supreme Court reviewed a tax levied by Maryland on the federally incorporated Bank of the United States. **The Court found that if a state had the power to tax a federally incorporated institution, then the state effectively had the power to destroy the federal institution**, thereby thwarting the intent and purpose of Congress. This would make the states superior to the federal government. The Court found that this would be inconsistent with the Supremacy Clause, which makes federal law superior to state law. **The Court therefore held that Maryland’s tax on the bank was unconstitutional because the tax violated the Supremacy Clause.**

    Fine, the USSC has the final say over **federal law, including constitutional interpretation**. HOWEVER, I fail to see how any of the charges Trump was convicted of fall under this umbrella.

    Unless someone else can show me what I am missing, I don’t think he has any shot here…

  13. Trump doesn’t understand his home state but 80m Americans are happy for him to run all 50 states.

  14. The fact that he thinks this is a viable option tells you everything you need to know about the SC.

  15. I won’t at all be surprised if they do. It will just be another nail in the coffin of this country. I know it is unlikely that they will, but a six – three decision supporting trump would not at all surprise me.

  16. Between the last two days.
    Trump: I’m fine with Prison or house arrest.
    Next day…
    Trump: SCOTUS should overturn my criminal conviction.

  17. The State of New York doesn’t have to abide by a Supreme Court decision. Texas ingnored a decision by SCOTUS on the border issue, so there’s already a precedent for telling SCOTUS to go pound sand thanks to a Republican governor.

  18. I have an idea…stop posting every stupid, unhinged thing that drips out this asswipe’s burger hole.

  19. that’s not how this works

    that’s not how any of this works

  20. His lawyers never protest his innocence, just that he shouldn’t face consequences.

  21. Trump also left open the possibility of seeking revenge on his political enemies if he were to win a second term, telling his interviewers that he struggled to answer the question. “It sounds beautiful, right: You know, my revenge will be success. And I mean that. But it’s awfully hard when you see what they’ve done,” he said. “These people are so evil. And at the same time, the country can come together.”

    Scary shit!

  22. Or I have an idea, why don’t we just tee him for a federal trial over an attempted coup?

    Or, dust off any one the 10 solid obstruction of justice charges cataloged by Mueller in his report.

    Or maybe the CIA takes a look at why they suddenly lost so many agents in the field right after Trump had secret meetings with Putin, off the record, and with no scribes or translators allowed.

  23. If his conviction is overturned, so should the sentences of people in prison in the United States.

    Fair is fair

  24. The Supreme Court has no jurisdiction over state courts, so how does he think they are supposed to do that?

  25. “Dumb Orange asshole doesn’t know the difference between State and Federal charges, seeks Presidency regardless.”

  26. Wasn’t he saying he was fine with going to jail just yesterday?

  27. The candidates for the presidency should have a basic understanding of how state and federal government works. I’d even go so far as there should be minimum job requirements for anyone running for office. Especially the goddamn president.

  28. That’s not how it works (or at least how it’s supposed to anyway).

  29. This clown still doesn’t understand how the US is governed, despite being president for 4 years 🙄

    And the polls are the way they are still.

  32. I bet they’re already looking at ways to make that happen.

    I have a feeling that they’ll apply the same extremely bad legal analysis that Fox News is peddling to be like a super appellate court.

    Hope the judge gives him at least the same amount of time as Cohen got.

    Or 30 days. Fuck. Can he just go to jail, a real jail, for 30 fucking days?

    It might be enough to break the spell.

  33. F*** you Donald. You pimple assed, narcissistic, sociopathic, misogynistic racist.

  34. Interesting that Trump calls his democratic opponents “fascist”. Imho that’s another example of him very deliberately muddying the water. He’s doing exactly what was predicted in 1984: Trying to come up with some sort of double speak, where rational thinking gets degraded because vocabulary has no concrete meaning anymore – all there’s left in the end is “follow the leader” because nothing else has intellectual or moral grounds.

    Not very knowledgeable about North Korea, but afaik they also are using vocabulary to make certain trains of thought difficult to express.

    Scary times.

  35. If SCOTUS does it, it would be the most corrupt move in U.S history imo.

  36. That sounds like federal overstepping. What ever happened to state’s rights?

  37. If supreme court gets involved, the USA is officially done. Imagine for this complete idiot this country has gone to shit. Pretty pathetic. I know there are deep seeded reasons but for this orange asshole to be the symbol of what made this country fake is beyond sad.

  38. Luckily, SCOTUS can not get involved in the New York Hush Money case for a number of years. Politically The SCOTUS MAGA Minions may be irate at the conviction. Legally, they can’t touch it until it has progressed through the state appellate system.

    On Cadet Bone Spurs’ immunity case — For 227 years, since Washington first took office, no president has had to worry about immunity for crimes, until Trump took office. All those presidents before him had to authorize or sanction some pretty bad stuff, both internationally and internally, but never worried about immunity. Only the MAGA Messiah is worried about immunity from the acts he authorized or sanctioned while in office. We know of some of his crimes, I’m wondering what else he did to get so wrought up about it.

    Of course, none of the previous presidents tried to prevent a peaceful transfer of power to the next duly elected (with ample evidence of that) president.

    None of the previous presidents knowingly violated national security laws by holding and maintaining classified documents. Previous presidents, who found classified material in their possession after leaving office, just turned them over to the National Archives, and got on with their lives.

    I think it’s amazing that only one president, out of 46, is worried about immunity. It makes one wonder what else he did while living in the Peoples House.

  39. The Supreme Court overruling a UNANIMOUS decleration by 12 jurors of his peers (a cornerstone of democracy), vetted by both counsels, would be unheard of even for them. It would throw bare the corruption in the SCOTUS and our democratic branch of government, without question. I don’t think they are that brazen or stupid, even for them.

  41. He committed the crime before office and was prosecuted after office, right? Being President had zero impact on the crime nor punishment.

    So the Supreme Court would have to make something up completely here to justify it. 

  42. For the Supreme Court to review a state court decision, there must be a substantial federal question involved, such as a violation of constitutional rights. Mere disagreement with the state court’s interpretation of state law is generally not enough.

    The Supreme Court will not review a state court decision if it is based on an “adequate and independent state ground”. This means if the decision rests solely on state law grounds without implicating federal issues, the Court lacks jurisdiction.

Leave a Reply