Trump’s rejected “separation of powers” argument to place him above the prison regulation and out of doors the reaches of federal court docket …
source
Trump’s rejected “separation of powers” argument to place him above the prison regulation and out of doors the reaches of federal court docket …
source
NEW 👽 VIDEO HERE —> https://youtu.be/NdKuXwPFqrg
I just know that all the Constitutional scholars, law abiding Citizens and professionals were going to step in and protect our Democracy. This is the U S A, I salute you all 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻❤️
The partisan republican Supreme Court will pull something out of their butts to keep trump on the ballot and avoid the wrath of trumps bird brain following.
It's just funny how you all wait three years for this. It shows how desperate demacrats are. We just turned into communist China. Dumnasses.
How did I know that they were going to screw trump over. But you guys are interfering in an election . You should have pull this shit three years ago not during the preliminaries. So what you guys are saying a person can't the elections. And it just show demacrats will do anything to stay in power.
Report very well done
My problem is with his puppets. He's a con man and he has taken his power all the way to the white house. He has destroyed others for doing his dirty work and he is still a free man. I am so sick of trump and the Republican puppets. If this clown get back into the white house this country will never be the same. All I can say is shame on America.
Putin runs the court
That is how putin runs russia the courts set him in power traitor trump
You done
Treason is not pretty just say no. the true blue American spirt.
Remember the Alamo
To explain this to Donald in words he will understand: Youse was electificated Preskidenk not God-Emperor-King-Poobah, ya idjit.
What about campaign rules and laws on how to use the donations?
Why do we choose some new and clean person to run this beautiful country that we love
Trump thinks if he says something enough times it will make it true.
I seriously hope Trump wins
There were 200 jan 6th rioters who plea bargained their testimony that trump ordered them to attack. There additional witnesses in trumps circle that trump originated the jan 6th insurrectionist. Trump isnt above the law.
Read the federalist papers,the framers,worried that the office of president could become the seat of a tyrant, or dictator,specifically if he was a member of a majority party,the basic foundation of democracy is the checks and balances and accountability democracy places on all state agents, therefore we conclude that both the cab driver and the president are accountable to the people.
And finally , civics class. Balanc😮e of power means WE DON'T HAVE DICKTATORS!
The rules don’t apply to king Donny!!!
He DOES have continuous immunity – immune from morality – please finish this unpolished turd off and “get him out of here”
It seems ridiculous that MAGA congress people are doing whatever Trump orders them to do in the govt. when he us not in the govt.
—- < The problem with the Anderson disqualification case is I didn't hear that they argued for disqualification by the court(s). but by an individual in a singular role…. or they "didn't know how it should be implemented". Perhaps you would expound on "writ of mandamus" and how this might apply to the Anderson case. Would the Judiciary or the SCOTUS be giving up any of their power to a state court if they rule in favor of Anderson? Would the Anderson case qualify as a "peculiar emergency or public importance"?
……."According to the U.S. Department of Justice, "Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy, which should only be used in exceptional circumstances of peculiar emergency or public importance."
….."The All Writs Act (28 U.S. Code § 1651) gave the "Supreme Court and all courts established by Act of Congress" the authority to issue writs of mandamus "in aid of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable to the usages and principles of law.
…. Further, 28 U.S. Code § 1361 gave federal district courts "original jurisdiction of any action in the nature of mandamus to compel an officer or employee of the United States or any agency thereof to perform a duty owed to the plaintiff.
Mandamus at the State Level
For comity (courtesy) purposes, state courts cannot direct a federal officer through a mandamus and federal courts likewise cannot issue a mandamus to a state officer." (law cornell edu)
According to State vs. Federal Jurisdiction in Criminal Cases (nolo). "a defendant can face prosecution for the same crime in both state and federal court". The rules of mandamus look like they could be a problem for the Anderson case). What might be the outcome if a state just charged 18 U.S.C. 2383?
—- < Thank you for elucidating on the DC Appeals Court ruling in U.S. v Trump. I think federal statute, 3 U.S.§ 301 also holds that Article II duties are subject to the rule of law for the President (and for those he appoints). …. This statute wasn't passed until June 25, 1948 but,in my view, it should take precedent over any previous misuse of the separation of powers existing in legal precedent. ….. The issue of a President being immune within his own sphere" is also refuted in U.S. v Nixon (1974) Page 418 U. S. 706
—- < My previous understanding from U.S. v Nixon (1974), page 418 U.S. 715.716, was that President Nixon may have misread the same opinion by Justice Marshall to justify his 1973 OLC opinion that a sitting President can't be indicted (noted at 25 F. Cas. at 192), OR Nixon's OLC may have referred to Mississippi v Johnson 1867.
…. In any case, it is my strong belief that the OLC has been blinded by this misreading for half a century. This DOJ rule should be revisited and, in my view, eliminated. The weight of law is against the rule.
….. The issue of a President being immune within his own sphere" is also refuted in U.S. v Nixon (1974) Page 418 U. S. 706, Executive Privilege for Article II functions in Separation of Powers:
—- < Do you think states could just apply the federal criminal statute 18 U.S.C. § 2383.
Under State vs. Federal Jurisdiction in Criminal Cases (nolo). "a defendant can face prosecution for the same crime in both state and federal court.".
Thank You , Popok, you are the best!🏆🥇
why can’t the Supreme Court just do what they’re supposed to do, which is to interpret the intention of a law, why it was passed, Why it was necessary to pass it, not all these other hypothetical, ramifications, Questions and semantics that they spend their time on?
"Not to put us above them" but the result is that SCOTUS is above the other branches, as they can just declare established precedent void and invalidate 50+ years of rights and progress.
MP…I really appreciate MT and have been watching it for a long time. Trump just goes on and on and on. People are sick of all this law!!!
Love it…just tough enough❤
And what did Q-Anon, Uncle Thomas say, "Everything is on the table"… youtube.com/watch?v=jL5LaLT2BJM As for the SCOTUS interference in
STATE RIGHTS… The 10th Amendment gives power to the states… The powers not delegated…by the Constitution…are reserved to the States… That means, the STATES have the right to determine who qualifies to appear on their State Ballot! And under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment… No person shall…hold any office…under the United States, or under any State, who…previously taken an oath, to support the Constitution…have engaged in insurrection or rebellion…given aid or comfort… The Colorado Supreme Court, found Trump to be disqualified from holding the office and ordered the Secretary of State not to include Trump's name on the Colorado presidential primary ballot. The hearing was over and the SCOTUS had no right to interfere with the State's Supreme Court. As the only recourse outline in Section 3, of the 14th Amendment is the last line… But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each Chamber, remove such disability. That is the only right the Chambers of Congress, have. How your 1% owners' puppets have played you.
Trump should have been locked up a long time ago.
I was listening to these Supreme Court people they sounded like nine idiots in those chairs, i really would love to leave them outta any decision making really…those other three woman from the appellate court should be running things PERIOD!!!
Hey YouTube. I'd like to know why my comments keep disappearing…🤨