House Speaker Mike Johnson requesting the SCOTUS get Involved,

@MistyCee you worried SCOTUS will interfere with the election interference? 🤣

@BizSuitStacy Lol. Not especially, but if they were to jump in before the state court appeals are done, I'm just saying it would still be a better look if they ruled on the related issues they've already accepted writs on and have been slow walking.

The Roberts Court, though, has had already had more than its share of controversy, though. And I actually think Trump may have a shot with the New York Court of Appeals.

@MistyCee Isn't this destined for the SCOTUS because they are trying to tie a federal crime to a state crime.

@MistyCee Because? The NY Appeals Court knows SCOTUS will throw this case out and they don't want to be embarrassed with a reversal.

@MistyCee That State's Prosecution will live on as the most corrupt in US history and in Law Schools. Even NY has to follow the rule of law and the Constitution.

@eli1601 I doubt it.

First though, this isn't my field and I haven't even tried to research it.

I don't know of any prohibition against that kind of thing, and it seems more likely to be a State law issue first, with US Constitutional issues maybe flowing from the application of State law issues after the State Courts have figured it out.


Which isn't to say that someone couldn't construct a really ingenious argument, and this SCOTUS isn't shy about overturning precedent in politically sensitive cases.

@MistyCee We'll see. One of the things I heard over and over, and not just on Fox, was Bragg was trying to use Federal law that was not in his jurisdiction.

@MistyCee Outside of NY, Bragg can't make an ingenious argument. The Judge, Jury, Prosecutor, and even the Judge's daughter all worked together to make sure the predetermined conviction happened before the election.

@eli1601 Yeah, I've heard that, too, and there's no doubt this is a really odd (and maybe ultimately unconstitutional) state crime, which ultimately could end up being decided by SCOTUS.

If you want to try researching it yourself, I'd suggest starting with Habeus Corpus, looking at that Colorado case, and the state immigration law carses to start, but it'd probably be a bear of project to tackle just out of curiosity, and by the time you get into it, there would probably be a half dozen legal commentators on air who could save you a lot of time.

I hope you're right.
Fear of reversal didn't stop the four corrupt Colorado Supreme Court judges from ruling 4-3 that Trump couldn't appear on the ballot in Colorado, even though those utterly politicized scoundrels must have known that they would be overruled by the U.S. Supreme Court (which they were, 9-0).

@Thinkerbell Soros money causes a lot of problems. This case is strictly politically based on taking out an opponent before an election. There is no way SCOTUS is not going to get involved.

@TexChik Hey there. Sorry that I missed your comments. Do you have any thoughts on what Trump should file to get SCOTUS to help him out?

@MistyCee The judge's charge to the jury is the easiest fatal flaw to start with, followed by the specific charges in this case. The defendant and every legal expert who watched or sat in court did not know the specific charges, even at the end of the trial. There is so much to unpack about this case to list the constitutional rights violations that it will take a moment. I would think that in the interest of our election process and given that this kind of stunt has not happened since the days of John Adams, I believe the court will agree to hear the case sooner rather than later in an attempt to maintain fair elections and to ensure that the constitutional rights of the defendant are upheld.

@TexChik So, you'd just title it Emergency Writ of Certiorari, fill up your paper with assignments of error and see what happens?

@MistyCee The facts are clearly evident in the court record.

@TexChik I guess we'll see. I still think it would be better overall for Trump to have to go through the regular appellate system, but I also see how the Supreme Court might want to jump in and give him special consideration.

The NY case will run its course up the chain. The result in the SCOTUS case may make it moot. @TexChik @MistyCee

If the NY appellate courts barrel full steam after a SCOTUS decision favoring Trump then something out of the usual may occur. @MistyCee

@MistyCee and interfere with his campaign as intended? SCOTUS needs to act swiftly to ensure lawfare has no place in our elections , or elections become unnecessary.

Indeed @TexChik

@TexChik Maybe they could make the ruling sua sponte, without waiting for him to ask or even reviewing the original record?

@MistyCee I think this would qualify as a constitutional crisis they can not ignore.

@TexChik I think I see where you're coming from, but for the sake of what comes next for everyone, including even Trump himself, I'd prefer if SCOTUS at least waits until someone asks to exercise jurisdiction to overrule a lower State Court.

Remember, there are still Democrats on the Court, and even other Trumpists might get too big for their britches and, well, like maybe Michael Cohen did, do things for Trump, expect to get paid back, and rewarded.

@MistyCee "Trumpists" might get too big for their britches? Do you mean while socialists destroy the Constitution and the American justice system and set themselves up to keep power by imprisoning their opposition? Wow, quoting a serial perjurer, felon, and admitted embezzler is your idea of qualification for those actions? There are a minority of libs on the court, who also unanimously ruled against NY when they violated the first amendment rights of the NRA recently. This can not be allowed to stand and needs to be reversed.

@TexChik I didn't quote Cohen. I used him as an example of what can happen when employees get disgruntled and feel like they should expect loyalty from Trump and don't get it.

It almost seems like you're panicking, worrying so much about the effect of this jury verdict that you're not seeing the individual trees and only worried about the forest on fire.

Remember, even after Trump's coronation, laws, customs and institutions could still be useful for governing, and if treated right, even used to more gracefully implement a final solution to the liberal problem.