The Supreme Court temporarily agreed to block a congressional subpoena of Deutsche Bank for President Trump’s financial records.
This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://talkingpointsmemo.com/?p=1267007
This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://talkingpointsmemo.com/?p=1267007
1 Like
Not enough fingers to plug the holes in this dike.
11 Likes
Eventually (and I hope it’s soon) SCOTUS with have to make a decision on one of the cases involving Trump’s financial records. They’ll only have to decide against Trump on one of them for all of his finances to be exposed. It seems very unlikely that even this Supreme Court would decide that a sitting President is above the law and should never even be investigated, so I don’t see this ending well for Trump. I only hope it ends soon.
33 Likes
I understand this is probably standard procedure, but is it too much to wish for that once, just once, someone would stop these a-holes cold with a big, nasty, NO?!
19 Likes
I may be SOP but it’s still very disappointing.
13 Likes
More Supreme court news and lost for Trump:
U.S. Supreme Court rejects Trump bid to resume federal executions
28 Likes
It was RBG who granted the stay, so I think she has her reasons. My guess is that she want’s to establish a precedent once and for all that Trump’s argument is not acceptable in a ruling that couldn’t be more clear. I only hope that the matter is settled soon.
28 Likes
One can only wonder how long it will take the moron to recognize the significance of today’s date and pay tribute no matter how brief to lives lost that day 78 years day.
29 Likes
All the lower courts have ruled for the House. It would be very difficult, not impossible, but very difficult for SCOTUS to reasonably claim they found legitimate grounds to rule otherwise. The worst they can do, it would seem, is to needlessly delay their verdict. Though with a Senate trial looming, I don’t think Roberts would want to do that. Better to get it all out now.
22 Likes
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg granted the stay, which will be in effect until December 13. In the meantime the court will decide whether to give the Trump administration a longer stay as it gives Trump’s lawyers time to file a formal appeal.
Let’s be clear about this: it was RBG that issued the stay. She’s never done anything that wasn’t completely warranted. I will withhold judgement until I see what the final action is.
21 Likes
Well you always stop the action pending appeal. Otherwise it moots the appeal.
11 Likes
Please block the blocking and get on with it.
Every minute Trump is in power the Free World is in danger.
14 Likes
No, it’s actually pretty rare. If these subpoenas did not involve the President of the United States – and, dare I limit it further, a Republican President of the United States – the district court rulings would never have been stayed in the first place.
Try to imagine Bill Clinton getting a stay from the Supreme Court to stop Ken Starr from DNA testing Monica’s dress. That’s how absurd this is. But here we are.
14 Likes
Are you referring to D-day because that was yesterday? Even so, I don’t think he did so. He was too busy complaining about the lighting reflecting off his orange makeup and how often he has to flush his toilet to make his shit go down.
4 Likes
There would be nothing to appeal of they decided to let the subpoena stand or refused.
5 Likes
Here’s a crazy scenario, but with Trump, you never know. What if he is in fact convicted in the Senate. Can he still run for President? Knowing him and his spiteful, malicious base, if it’s legal, it’s plausible.
2 Likes
RBG is wise, judicious and respectful of the U.S. Constitution and legal precedent. Donnie is not.
13 Likes
I believe the referral was to Pearl Harbor attack.
9 Likes
Given the stay and expedited briefing that the full Court already granted a couple weeks ago in the first case, there was no point doing anything other than granting the temporary administrative stay. Specifying that it expires next Friday indicates that the Court will be deciding whether to take up the cert. petition at next Friday’s conference, at which time they will either set the case(s) for oral argument or just deny review and lift the stays.
Reminder: It takes four votes to grant review, but five to reverse. And I’ll repeat my previous prediction that if they do grant certiorari, John Roberts will find some way to nominally uphold the law while remanding for further proceedings that will delay compliance until after the 2020 election.
6 Likes