It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Will trump ask SCOTUS to overturn his impeachment after acquittal ?

page: 1
25
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+2 more 
posted on Jan, 20 2020 @ 11:28 PM
link   
Here’s something to think about.

After acquittal in the Senate which which is virtually a certainty.

Will trump ask for his impeachment to be overturned by SCOTUS ?

No president or ex president (which Trump will be in five more years). 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸Wants to be remembered as being the the fourth president to be impeached.

The Senate is more than likely to rule on the faulty constitutional methods such as he didn’t commit a identifiable crime as specified in article 1. (among other possibilities)

The case falls right into the concurring opinions from Nixon vs the United States. Which also by the way happened after the conclusion of Nixon’s senate trial.

In Nixon vs The US The issue at hand was whether Nixon was properly “tried” because he went before a committee instead of the full Senate.

All 9 justices ruled against Nixon so the district court verdict was held.

But 4 justices gave concurring opinions disagreeing with the majority in part. They believed there might be room for judicial review. All 4 mentioned it in “improbable hypotheticals” in the Senate which was named in the suit. (In this case house) .

If they acted improperly or biased in their responsibilities a case might be reviewable. Namely in my opinion the partisan witchhunt and handicapping of any defense during the Impeachment investigation.

I went over this in another thread which I’ll link . But I feel the need to reiterate.

Because if I have to defend Nixon vs The US I’ll have to post it anyway. So I figured I’ll just get it out-of-the-way. But I will shorten it drastically.

Justice SOUTER


One can, nevertheless, envision different and unusual circumstances that might justify a more searching review of impeachment proceedings. If the Senate were to act in a manner seriously threatening the integrity of its results, convicting, say, upon a coin-toss, or upon a summary determination that an officer of the United States was simply " 'a bad guy,' " ante, at ____ (WHITE, J., concurring in judgment), judicial interference might well be appropriate.


www.law.cornell.edu... " target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> www.law.cornell.edu...

Justices White and Blackmum


The Court is of the view that the Constitution forbids us even to consider his contention. I find no such prohibition and would therefore reach the merits of the claim. I concur in the judgment because the Senate fulfilled its constitutional obligation to "try" petitioner.

Snip

It should be said at the outset that, as a practical matter, it will likely make little difference whether the Court's or my view controls this case. This is so because the Senate has very wide discretion in specifying impeachment trial procedures and because it is extremely unlikely that the Senate would abuse its discretion and insist on a procedure that could not be deemed a trial by reasonable judges.


www.law.cornell.edu... " target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> www.law.cornell.edu...


Justice Stevens


Respect for a coordinate Branch of the Government forecloses any assumption that improbable hypotheticals like those mentioned by Justice WHITE and Justice SOUTER will ever occur. Accordingly, the wise policy of judicial restraint, coupled with the potential anomalies associated with a contrary view, see ante at ____, provide a sufficient justification for my agreement with the views of THE CHIEF JUSTICE.


www.law.cornell.edu... " target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> www.law.cornell.edu...

We have four justices who disagreed that all impeachments are non-judicial. They all touched on abuse of the process ( among other things ) that we’re currently going through.

That’s a lot of persuasive precedent going into a 5 to 4 Conservative Court

I know this is a rehash of my earlier possession. But I didn’t see this new angle until recently .

Appealing the impeachment is hypothetical on my part.

But I think it’s possible.

www.abovetopsecret.com... " target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> www.abovetopsecret.com...

Just imagine the reaction on the left if this scenario came to pass.

Dogs and cats sleeping together mass hysteria .








edit on 20-1-2020 by Fallingdown because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 20 2020 @ 11:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown

If you're not already a politician in America, why aren't you



posted on Jan, 20 2020 @ 11:37 PM
link   
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

I think it's because he seems always angry and carries a club. But then, you're talking USA.

I love clubs, especially the RSL.

Kind regards,

Bally



posted on Jan, 20 2020 @ 11:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: Fallingdown

If you're not already a politician in America, why aren't you


For the same reason Bernie Madoff isn’t .

We’re way to honest . 😎



posted on Jan, 20 2020 @ 11:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown

Ok then, S&F



posted on Jan, 20 2020 @ 11:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown
I gave you a star because your OP is an interesting intellectual discussion/topic.

it is worth looking at and IF it were done the democrats fits would make everything done so far taken as a whole look like a letter to the editor in a HS paper.

but in reality it is not even in the realm of possibility much less probability

as the last two impeachment (I dont count nixon because he resigned before anything could become of it) show there is no shame in being "impeached" if you aint removed from office.

in reality it would be a PR BOOM to trump (and anyone who supports him) and a nightmare to democrats (not just the liberals since ALL FLAVORS of democrats with few exceptions supported this) .

why would he (except for the shlits and giggles of them exploding) waste precious time he has that is needed for more wins for the US citizens .

scrounger



posted on Jan, 20 2020 @ 11:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: Fallingdown

Ok then, S&F


Wha????

Nek Minnut. OAM awarded,

Bally



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 12:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown

Regardless if he will. I do not think he should.

I think it is far more damning for partisans to have this on the books than to have it struck from the record.



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 12:00 AM
link   
a reply to: bally001

Honesty has my vote, even when it's dishonest.



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 12:03 AM
link   
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Well Amanda Keller got one, we should frisbee another across the pond to F en D.

Bally




posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 12:05 AM
link   
It just feels too much like school age drama and forced theatrics.

The whole impeachment debacle just creates an even deeper layer of personality clashes and everyone gossiping about whatever.

I can't believe anyone takes anything in the news seriously at this point. All people want is to control each other and milk them for profits, I guess, whatever the hell you want to call it.

I dream of a greater future where people actually want to help each other rather than devoting themselves to using others for personal gain. That requires a good education system which we coincidentally don't currently have.

So really in the whole scheme of life on Earth, no it doesn't matter much. The truth is we could have spent all this time and energy on something of value but it's been squandered over pointless bickering.

I do think we need a much stronger Constitution and we as a people ought to be more seriously devoted to it's study.

I don't even recognize this govt anymore, it's filled with vultures and snakes and it's been abused and eroded. Everyone's partying on the govt dime making inside deals to embezzle all our way too high taxes, and they really don't care what normal people feel or think.

We are going to have to start over soon I'm pretty sure. Not sure how long this whole charade can last. Y'all do realize this is all BS to distract us from how we're being robbed right?



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 12:09 AM
link   
a reply to: bally001

Gotta admit though she was gold when working with Denton.



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 12:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: muzzleflash
It just feels too much like school age drama and forced theatrics.

The whole impeachment debacle just creates an even deeper layer of personality clashes and everyone gossiping about whatever.

I can't believe anyone takes anything in the news seriously at this point. All people want is to control each other and milk them for profits, I guess, whatever the hell you want to call it.

I dream of a greater future where people actually want to help each other rather than devoting themselves to using others for personal gain. That requires a good education system which we coincidentally don't currently have.

So really in the whole scheme of life on Earth, no it doesn't matter much. The truth is we could have spent all this time and energy on something of value but it's been squandered over pointless bickering.

I do think we need a much stronger Constitution and we as a people ought to be more seriously devoted to it's study.

I don't even recognize this govt anymore, it's filled with vultures and snakes and it's been abused and eroded. Everyone's partying on the govt dime making inside deals to embezzle all our way too high taxes, and they really don't care what normal people feel or think.

We are going to have to start over soon I'm pretty sure. Not sure how long this whole charade can last. Y'all do realize this is all BS to distract us from how we're being robbed right?




You're a dreamer, nothing wrong with that other than disappointment.



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 12:12 AM
link   
a reply to: muzzleflash

While I agree with your sentiment, I think we disagree on one fundamental point.

You suggest: "I do think we need a much stronger Constitution and we as a people ought to be more seriously devoted to it's study."

My rebuttable would be:
The constitution is plenty strong. The issue is a lack of legal challenges to antithetical laws that have become normalized.
And now the norms said laws have created.



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 12:17 AM
link   
It boils down to... half the world is Good, and half is Evil +/- a few. For a long time Evil has won, now it's a time of reckoning.

Thus you see the Democrats paying the Piper.
Selling your soul to the Devil is bad economics.


oh... and let us hope the SCOTUS overturns

edit on 21-1-2020 by Plotus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 12:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: scrounger
a reply to: Fallingdown
I gave you a star because your OP is an interesting intellectual discussion/topic.

it is worth looking at and IF it were done the democrats fits would make everything done so far taken as a whole look like a letter to the editor in a HS paper.

but in reality it is not even in the realm of possibility much less probability

as the last two impeachment (I dont count nixon because he resigned before anything could become of it) show there is no shame in being "impeached" if you aint removed from office.

in reality it would be a PR BOOM to trump (and anyone who supports him) and a nightmare to democrats (not just the liberals since ALL FLAVORS of democrats with few exceptions supported this) .

why would he (except for the shlits and giggles of them exploding) waste precious time he has that is needed for more wins for the US citizens .

scrounger



Trumps ego is larger than all of the DC.

Richard Milhouse Nixon resigned his stigma was there to last .

What and probably shrugged it off the politics .

But because of trumps enormous ego and the way they’ve attacked him for three years .

He’s going to take it as a personal insult .

Plus I included this then edited it out twice .

If Trump did appeal it what would be the best timing ?

Immediately and get his name cleared before the general election . Which would piss the left off .

Wait till after the election appeal and win . Which would doubly enrage the left . ( yes they can get madder)

Or file a motion asking for an extension until his presidency is over. For the good of the country .

I would sure as hell like to see number three . He could protest the impeachment and look like a unifier while doing it .
I wonder how the media would cover that ?

But my man Trump is the Commander and troll. He would probably pick number two . 😝



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 12:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown




Here’s something to think about. After acquittal in the Senate which which is virtually a certainty. Will trump ask for his impeachment to be overturned by SCOTUS ?


Well, I'm a little confused.

Impeachment is simply a charge or set of charges. Accusations if you will.

How would a court overturn an accusation or charge?

I thought an appeals court only dealt with verdicts/laws - not charges.

Additionally, I don't believe SCOTUS would even weigh in until the appropriate trial body - in this case, the US Senate - renders some sort of verdict....after some sort of trial.

N'est pas?



edit on 1/21/2020 by Riffrafter because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 12:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown

President Trump will have solid legal grounds to request an overturn of the House Impeachment. Many rules were violated, and no crime is listed in either impeachment article. Since the President is not shy, it's likely he will ask.



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 12:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown

All your citations addresses the possibility of a SCOTUS review if the SENATE somehow abuses it's power and wrongfully convicts a president. But, you're sure the SENATE will acquit.

Trump is impeached by The House of Representatives.


edit on 21-1-2020 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2020 @ 12:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Riffrafter

Although they referenced the Senate in the Nixon case .

The opinion given for the reason was if Congress abused the impeachment clause of the Constitution .

Which means SCOTUS could involve itself because it would be a constitutional issue .

SCOUTS is the keeper and interpreter of the constitution. They have to take up any case that they think has unsettled constitutional implications.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Just saw your post Sookie the answer is included in this one .
edit on 21-1-2020 by Fallingdown because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
25
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join