Jack Smith's cases in jeopardy because he was NOT legally appointed. (Poll)

[Aldo Raine]

Durham was confirmed by the Senate in 2018. Try harder, Smith never was.

No, he was confirmed by the senate to be a U.S. attorney for Connecticut. Not what Barr did even AFTER tRump lost the 2020 election.
MAGA

 

[berg80]

Judge questions Trump lawyers, prosecutors about Jack Smith appointment

FORT PIERCE, Fla. — Former president Donald Trump’s attorneys argued in federal court here Friday that the classified document case against him should be dismissed because the top prosecutor in the case was improperly appointed.

The long-shot argument is based on a legal premise pushed in some conservative circles that the Senate should have approved Attorney General Merrick Garland’s appointment of special counsel Jack Smith, who is overseeing the federal investigations against Trump.

Smith’s team called that argument “unsound” and said Garland has clear authority to appoint lawyers to fulfill Justice Department functions. Similar challenges to other recent special counsels, including Robert S. Mueller III, have been rejected in court.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati.../21/trump-cannon-jack-smith-pretrial-hearing/

If we have learned anything about conservative judges it's they give no regard to sound legal precedent if going against it fits their ideological bent.

The Attorney General is the head of the Department of Justice ("the Department"). 28 U.S.C. § 503. The Attorney General must be appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate. Id. Congress also created the position of Deputy Attorney General, who also must be appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate. Id. § 504. Congress has "vested" in the Attorney General virtually "[a]ll functions of other officers of the Department," id. § 509, and has empowered the Attorney General to authorize other Department officials to perform the functions of the Attorney General, id. § 510. Congress has also authorized the Attorney General to commission attorneys "specially retained under the authority of the Department" as "special assistant to the Attorney General or special attorney," id. § 515(b), and provided "any attorney specially appointed by the Attorney General under law, may, when specifically directed by the Attorney General, conduct any kind of legal proceeding, civil or criminal ... which United States attorneys are authorized by law to conduct," id. § 515(a). Congress has also provided for the Attorney General to "appoint officials ... to detect and prosecute crimes against the United States." Id. § 533(1). These statutes authorize the Attorney General to appoint special counsels and define their duties.

In re Grand Jury Investigation, 916 F.3d 1047 | Casetext Search + Citator

Read In re Grand Jury Investigation, 916 F.3d 1047, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database

casetext.com

 

[Skylar]

You will be.

No. I won't be.

Shoe horning in a completely unrelated issue would be an extraordinary outcome. If the SCOTUS felt the case that extraordinary and imperative, they wouldn't have waited this long to release the ruling.

As a general rule of thumb, SCOTUS rulings are tight and focused on narrow legal questions. They very, very rarely just tack on unrelated legal questions into a ruling.

Regardless of what Thomas might want.