The judges appear so far to be skeptical of DA Vance's appeal.
Judge Jeffrey Oing: "They’ve got enough to get an indictment, and they’re doing a pivot to get to the double jeopardy."
Todd Blanche: "At the end of the day, there are hard cases and there are easy cases, but this is not a hard case."
The panel does not appear to question that proposition that the double jeopardy argument is an easy call, and the argument goes back to Vance's counsel.
Judge Dianne Renwick asks Figueredo: So you’re saying this is a legislative issue, not one for us?
Figueredo replies that the charges the mortgage fraud allegations are very different from bank fraud.
The hearing abruptly ends without a ruling.
Context: Judge Renwick's question about the "legislative issue" went to the NY Legislature tightening double-jeopardy standards.
He was order to appear after the Georgia election workers he defamed say he "secreted away" assets from his N.Y. apartment — and reportedly went to Trump's polling station in a Mercedes convertible ordered to be turned over to them.
The hearing has begun.
Attorney for Giuliani: Ken Caruso.
For Ga. election workers Shaye Moss and Ruby Freeman: Aaron Nathan
Nathan:
Giuliani disclosed new bank accounts opened in July 2024.
On Aug. 30, Giuliani and his associates opened up a new entity: Standard USA LLC, over which he has +80% ownership interest.
"Suffice it to say, it's troubling that we learned about it on Monday for the first time."
A Georgia judge has VOIDED several rules passed by the GOP-dominated State Election Board.
The Georgia GOP reportedly plans to appeal, per @Bluestein.
I'll break down the now-stricken rules in a thread below, summarizing the ruling linked here. 🔗 assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2…
1) 183-1-12-.02(c.2):
This rule would have allowed county board members to conduct a "reasonable inquiry" of election results, an undefined power they previously never had and was the purview of the courts.
Jack Smith just filed a superseding indictment against Trump.
Prosecutors say the new indictment "reflects the Government’s efforts to respect and implement the Supreme Court’s holdings and remand instructions in Trump v. United States."
A superseding indictment replaces an existing indictment.
There are no new charges in today's indictment against Trump here, only the same four leveled against him in connection with the 2020 election, tailored to pass the Supreme Court's new test.
Today's news does, however, mean that another grand jury that did not see the evidence earlier put their stamp on the same charges.
On a quick glance, the latest indictment is shorter, and nixes DOJ-related claims that wouldn't have survived the immunity ruling.
Trump's lawyers filed a motion to vacate his 34 felony convictions and dismiss his New York indictment.
In the wake of SCOTUS's immunity ruling, they argue that certain testimony and evidence shouldn't have been introduced at trial, like the categories shown here.
DA Bragg's deadline to respond to Trump's arguments is July 24.
A few thoughts on this:
Trump's lawyers are not just challenging his convictions, based on the alleged use of "official-acts evidence."
Since prosecutors brought some of this evidence to the grand jury, they want his indictment thrown out too.