I have always thought Lawrence Tribe THE EXPERT in all maters law. He does not realize this means the Sup Ct will decide it in Trumps favor? I will bet real money. And I can even paraphrase how it will be done; just a narrow unciteable decision on technical grounds, 5-4; decision written by (barf) Kavanaugh.
Given that this could expose tRumps flanks, expect any minute a decree to close all the Federal Courthouses
1 Like
Assuming Trump survives CV
Agree except for this part.
Robert’s would not assign Kav or Gorsuch on that one.
He has his (bullshit) legacy to think about.
Maybe so, but en banc argument, decision, then appeal to the Supremes… by then Trump is out of office, and there will be a “no standing” on the moot point, I assume.
Then again, if Trump is re-elected, it goes on and on.
Beam me up, Scotty.
I wonder if the mere fact that the appeals court wants to revisit this en banc is an indication that they know the previous “ruling” was problematic.
Yes, the Supreme Court will probably ultimately rule in Trump’s favor (and his appointed justices will not recuse). Of course, they will need to make sure that the power to subpoena still exists for Republicans to subpoena any Democratic administration. (They might as well just come out and state that in the final decision.)
2 Likes
The Court of Appeals decision is usually the last word on such matters.
And an en banc ruling is somewhat less likely to be granted cert by SCOTUS.
2 Likes
The Speaker and for that matter all House members also would be unelected so they are out of the line of succession. It then moves moves to the president pro tempore of the Senate. The only elected persons not affected by not having an election would be the 2/3s of the senate not up this year. Of those 2/3s still in office, would the majority be held by Dems or Reps? More Rs are up for reelection this year than Ds so perhaps a Dem senator would be next in line.
1 Like
“The three-judge appellate panel ruled last month that the courts did not have the authority to decide subpoena disputes between Congress and the executive branch.”
The ruling never made any sense. How could they decide this when it is a clear the constitutional duty of the federal courts to arbitrate disputes between the legislative and executive branches?
(edit - added “the” before “constitutional”)
3 Likes
The court will hold oral arguments in the cases on April 28
Unless Trump disbands them, because, you know, the executive branch can’t take sides in a dispute between the judicial and legislative branches. Best to just stop it.
Assuming she remains in office as speaker, Congress’ official next term begins 1/3/21, which is a few weeks before the Presidential inauguration.
So odds are she will be “cocked and loaded” (to borrow a phrase) for whatever happens. Pray for her continued good health!
2 Likes