Lisa Rubin Profile picture
Apr 29 5 tweets 2 min read Read on X
NEW: You might have heard folks say, in the wake of the Supreme Court immunity argument, that sending this case down for the district court to parse what is official versus personal could substantially prolong the time to trial. Enter Ex. A: Image
This is an order entered tonight in three civil cases against Trump for his role in 1/6; in those cases, the D.C. Circuit reaffirmed former presidents are entitled to civil immunity for acts even on the "outer perimeter" of their official duties.
But they held Trump had not yet shown his entitlement to such immunity and would instead have a chance to prove in the lower court that "his alleged actions in the runup to and on January 6 were taken in his official capacity as President." Image
That opinion was handed down on December 1, 2023. And now, in the last days of April, Judge Amit Mehta, the district court judge to whom the case has been assigned, has allowed the parties to conduct "immunity-related discovery" through September 11, 2024.
Now think about the criminal case before Judge Chutkan: In a world where the Supreme Court similarly decides there must be further lower court proceedings to determine whether Trump can mount an immunity defense, can that case be tried before 2025? Increasingly, I think not--and that might be the only win Trump wants or needs.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Lisa Rubin

Lisa Rubin Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @lawofruby

Jul 17
The @nytimes story on JD Vance at @YaleLawSch is the most Yale Law tale of all time.
A professor mired in controversy as literary fairy godmother? Check. Another professor simultaneously endorsing & dissing the subject? Check. The self-deprecation involved in any athletic pursuit? The affectionate “island of misfit toys” label, as applied to self and classmates? Check & more check.
But in all seriousness, the article reflects @YaleLawSch at its best and worst. For those who arrive without generational wealth or academic cache, it can be transformative, even propulsive.
Read 12 tweets
Jul 12
NEW: A federal bankruptcy judge has dismissed Rudy Giuliani's bankruptcy, allowing GA election workers Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss to start collecting on their $148 million judgment now.

msnbc.com/top-stories/la…
What does that mean practically? Unless a higher court stays enforcement, Freeman and Moss can use their judgment to take assets from Rudy. But even assuming no higher court intervenes, it's doubtful they'll collect even a tenth of what he owes them. 2/
And given Giuliani’s true obstreperousness during the bankruptcy, as detailed by today's opinion, Freeman and Moss might need the help of private investigators and forensic accountants to determine where Rudy’s assets are hidden. 3/
Read 8 tweets
Jul 12
NEW: That 1 p.m. hearing in Rudy Giuliani's bankruptcy case was canceled; Judge Sean Lane has pledged to issue a written decision by the close of business today. What could happen? 1/
Ruby Freeman & Shaye Moss, the GA election workers with a $148 million verdict against Rudy, have asked that his bankruptcy petition be dismissed. That would allow them to immediately enforce their judgment & would allow him to proceed with his appeal. 2/
Earlier this week, despite choosing to file for bankruptcy and elongating the process through his delay tactics, Rudy reversed course and decided to support their ask. 3/
Read 7 tweets
Jul 11
When the Supreme Court immunity decision came down, some of us said its worse pieces were the prohibitions on using conduct immune from prosecution as evidence and considering motive to suss out what is official versus unofficial conduct. 1/
Trump's brief to overturn the NY criminal verdict because of those pieces illustrates why. It assumes virtually all statements made & actions taken in office were official and that testimony about them is similarly off limits, even if coming from private actors, like Michael Cohen. 2/
And while judges can consider "content, form, and context" of his statements to determine whether or not they are official, they can't look to his motive. So Trump's telling Cohen that then-AG Jeff Sessions would take care of the FEC inquiry? Absolutely immune, says Trump. 3/
Read 8 tweets
Jul 8
The GOP platform is like a Rorschach test on fetal personhood. If you're looking for assurance that Trump's GOP won't press for a national abortion ban, you might point to this language. 1/
"We believe that the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States guarantees that no person can be denied Life or Liberty without Due Process, and that the States are, therefore, free to pass Laws protecting those Rights." But who's a person in this sentence? 2/
Susan B. Anthony Pro Life America's public statement on the platform -- which would otherwise seem disappointing to the anti-abortion right -- is a tell. They characterize the GOP platform as "reaffirm[ing] its commitment to protect unborn life today through the 14th Amendment." 3/
Read 6 tweets
Jul 6
Trump was expected to start the GOP convention on 7/15 with a criminal sentence. Now, he’ll go to Milwaukee having told the sentencing judge on 7/10 that the verdict must be set aside because it relied on evidence the prosecutors should never have been allowed to use. 1/
The breadth of the Court’s ruling — especially as it pertains to the admissibility of evidence and the legal irrelevance of a defendant president’s motive or purpose in determining what is and is not off limits — is just starting to reveal itself. 2/
And perhaps what’s worst of all is that underneath all that breadth is a gaping lack of guidance, which means lower court judges striving to do the right thing will almost certainly run afoul of this higher court or that one. 3/
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(