BREAKING: Supreme Court That Blocked Vaccine Mandates & Quarantine Orders Suddenly VERY Concerned About Immunity.

//

(via Image Generator)

The Supreme Court took some time away from casually musing about whether dictionaries require letting women die on emergency room tables, to consider whether a former president of the United States has blanket, absolute immunity from all crimes committed in office. Or at least all crimes related to “official acts,” which Trump’s counsel suggested would extend to assassinating political rivals.

googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-top-300x250" ); });

This is, of course, insane and ground that the Republic thoroughly covered over Nixon.

Sponsored Generative AI In Legal Work — What’s Fact And What’s Fiction? Zach Warren from the Thomson Reuters Institute discusses the potential and the pitfalls. From THOMSON REUTERS  

But while some justices see the Constitution as it is and ask, “Why?”, the right-wing of this Court dreams things that never were and ask, “Why not?”

BREAKING: Supreme Court that blocked vaccine mandates & struck down quarantine orders suddenly VERY concerned about immunity.

— Joe Patrice (@JosephPatrice) April 25, 2024

googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-middle-300x250" ); }); googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-storycontent-440x100" ); }); googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-in-story-youtube-1x1" ); });

For the record, no, I do not want to “See the latest COVID-19 information on X.” But I’m sure Elon Musk has built a fabulous landing page for Joe Rogan and Aaron Rodgers to share their thoughts. On the other hand, we might have actually discovered something crazier than the hypotheticals on display today.

That's, uh, …. pic.twitter.com/wQs0UvWwa5

— Leah Litman (@LeahLitman) April 25, 2024

Sponsored Sponsored Is The Future Of Law Distributed? Lessons From The Tech Adoption Curve The rise of remote work has dramatically reshaped the relationship between Lawyers and Law Firms, see how Scale LLP has taken the steps to get… From The Team at Scale LLP   Sponsored Generative AI In Legal Work — What’s Fact And What’s Fiction? Zach Warren from the Thomson Reuters Institute discusses the potential and the pitfalls. From THOMSON REUTERS   Sponsored Navigating Financial Success by Avoiding Common Pitfalls and Maximizing Firm Performance In this CLE-eligible webinar, we’ll explore the most common accounting pitfalls and how to avoid them for your firm. From Pilot and Above The Law   Sponsored The Business Case For AI At Your Law Firm ChatGPT ushers in the age of generative AI – even for law firms. From THOMSON REUTERS  

I stand corrected, oral argument was worse than the COVID freak page.

And while peddling batshit hypotheticals was the mission of the day for Trump’s team, Sauer couldn’t hold a candle to the energy coming from the Court’s right flank.

googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-bottom-300x250" ); });

Ah. Much the same way he thought vaccine mandates were questionably effective, I suppose. In his defense, there were a lot of questions, it’s just that they were all repeatedly and conclusively resolved in Biden’s favor.

Alas, Sam was just getting warmed up:

Sponsored Sponsored The Business Case For AI At Your Law Firm ChatGPT ushers in the age of generative AI – even for law firms. From THOMSON REUTERS   Sponsored Legal AI: 3 Steps Law Firms Should Take Now If 2023 introduced legal professionals to generative AI, then 2024 will be when law firms start adapting to utilize it. Things are moving fast, so… From LexisNexis  

Really really cool to watch Alito abandon all logic entirely by saying "leaving office peacefully is important, how could a president do that without immunity?" when the case in hand is literally about a president who did not leave office peacefully & instead tried a coup. pic.twitter.com/3BGRWcMd8p

— Aubrey Nagle (@aubsn) April 25, 2024

WHEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

Image via Frinkiac & Getty & my photoshop skills

Unwilling to let Alito have all the fun, Thomas decided to wax philosophic about all the past coups in American history.

Wait, what?

He’s asking about presidents overthrowing foreign governments like Allende in Chile or Árbenz in Guatemala. Personally, I thought that suggesting aid for an international coup would present the same bundle of domestic criminal justice issues as siccing a mob of slack-jawed armed hooligans on the U.S. Capitol would involve levels of mendacity that would give even Thomas pause.

I was wrong about that!

Throughout the argument, conservative justices — particularly Alito — bemoaned the weaponization of law enforcement and the horror of overzealous criminal prosecutors. It’s a new leaf for a gang who routinely rubberstamps death warrants, but don’t worry… this concern for criminal defendants stops at inconveniencing a Republican president:

The Chief, meanwhile, struck a compromise tone. And by “compromise,” we mean “let’s just give Trump what he wants but in a way that doesn’t put a spotlight on us.”

In other words, if we lay low long enough, Trump will either win and pardon himself or Biden will win and we can quickly fire off an “of course presidents can go to jail, silly” opinion. It’s hard to envision which thorny fact issues the court below needs to untangle after Trump’s lawyer conceded to Justice Barrett that most of the indictment deals with private activity that has no immunity argument at all.

But as they say, “life tenure means never having to say you’re sorry.”

Earlier: SCOTUS Conservatives Show Their Whole Asses In Trump Immunity Argument

Joe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search.

Topics

Courts, Donald Trump, Government, Sam Alito, Supreme Court