What does the sentencing ruling say about trump's SC?

[yidnar]

No they aren't. Any conversations were about hiring recommendations for applicants in the administration, nothing to do with the court case.

Right Justice Alito?

WW

we shall see ..

 

[Cellblock2429]

It means trump will be the Felon-in-Chief. It means you voted for a convicted felon.

It's not my or the Dem's conviction, it's the jury's conviction.

/——/

 

[skye]

 

[skye]

Charges brought by a bunch of ravenous dems who seethe with hatred. Yeah, your conviction means absolutely nothing.

Exactly right!

 

[Independent thinker]

A Rebuke to Trump Provides a Telling Portrait of a Divided Supreme Court​

A Rebuke to Trump Provides a Telling Portrait of a Divided Supreme Court

Two Republican appointees, Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Barrett, joined the court’s three liberals in ordering the president-elect to face sentencing on Friday.

www.nytimes.com

First and foremost it says trump has four conservative justices who are willing to rule in his favor no matter what. They're all in for trumpery, legality be damned. To paraphrase what Judge Richard Posner once said, those justices make up their minds based on politics and then proceed to find a legal rationale to support their decision.

It says once in a while John Roberts shows concern about the already damaged legacy of the Court that bares his name. But not often enough. He will forever by remembered as the justice who authored the extra constitutional presidential immunity ruling based solely on partisan politics.

It also says Amy Barrett is not always a reliable vote as part of the right wing extremist's block.

She wrote a notable dissent, joined by liberal justices, from a decision limiting the tools prosecutors can use in cases against members of the Jan. 6 mob. And she voted with the court’s three-member liberal wing in March, saying the majority had ruled too broadly in restoring former President Donald J. Trump to the Colorado ballot.

As gratifying as it is to know trump will be sworn in with a label he so richly deserves, convicted felon, the toothless sentencing shows once again how the system has contorted itself to compromise the way in which it holds him responsible for his many crimes. Most of which his use of lawfare has rendered moot.

Trump doesn't have a Supreme Court. They are an independent body, just like Biden's DOJ.

 

[ThisIsMe]

A Rebuke to Trump Provides a Telling Portrait of a Divided Supreme Court​

A Rebuke to Trump Provides a Telling Portrait of a Divided Supreme Court

Two Republican appointees, Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Barrett, joined the court’s three liberals in ordering the president-elect to face sentencing on Friday.

www.nytimes.com

First and foremost it says trump has four conservative justices who are willing to rule in his favor no matter what. They're all in for trumpery, legality be damned. To paraphrase what Judge Richard Posner once said, those justices make up their minds based on politics and then proceed to find a legal rationale to support their decision.

It says once in a while John Roberts shows concern about the already damaged legacy of the Court that bares his name. But not often enough. He will forever by remembered as the justice who authored the extra constitutional presidential immunity ruling based solely on partisan politics.

It also says Amy Barrett is not always a reliable vote as part of the right wing extremist's block.

She wrote a notable dissent, joined by liberal justices, from a decision limiting the tools prosecutors can use in cases against members of the Jan. 6 mob. And she voted with the court’s three-member liberal wing in March, saying the majority had ruled too broadly in restoring former President Donald J. Trump to the Colorado ballot.

As gratifying as it is to know trump will be sworn in with a label he so richly deserves, convicted felon, the toothless sentencing shows once again how the system has contorted itself to compromise the way in which it holds him responsible for his many crimes. Most of which his use of lawfare has rendered moot.

What it shows is that the scotus isn't as partisan as you all thought. They've had a few instances now of not ruling in trumps favor.