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/

There are two absences in today’s SCOTUS ruling on presidential immunity that you should note. First, while making clear there is no immunity for unofficial acts, the majority doesn’t carve out any alleged conduct in the indictment that is definitively NOT immune. 1/ And that’s not because they are allergic to categorical determinations. Today’s decision makes clear that all alleged conduct stemming from Trump’s interactions with and/or direction of DOJ is absolutely immune. Why? 2/

You might be hearing that a president still could be prosecuted even for official acts if the presumption of immunity is rebutted. But that ignores three more granular features of the opinion that are akin to prosecutorial roadblocks. 1/ First, the bar to rebut that presumption is HIGH. The court says the question to ask is whether prosecuting the official act in question “would pose any dangers of intrusion on the authority and functions of the Executive Branch.” 2/

My favorite law school class was legislation (aka statutory interpretation)—and my read of the Fischer decision, putting on that hat, is textualism is a false god for the majority. 1/ There is literally no effort to deal with the plain language of the statute at issue; instead, the majority jumps right to what is usually a second-level analysis: How what it calls the “residual clause” should be understood from its surrounding words and structure? 2/

In lifting portions of the gag order today, Judge Merchan did remove the restrictions pertaining to jurors, but he left in place another order concerning the jury. And that order matters. 1/ Specifically, the judge notes that because of the "ample evidence to justify continued concern for the jurors," the protections laid out in a March 2024 order "regulating disclosure of juror information" will stay in place until he decides otherwise. 2/

I try not to tweet and talk simultaneously (and just came off air from another SCOTUS decision morning), but the Manhattan DA’s brief mostly opposing the lifting of the gag order deserves attention today. 1/ When the DA first sought a gag order, it presented evidence of the threats dating back to last year. But
now, he cites recent, serious threats, including “bomb threats at the homes of two people involved in this case” on the first day of trial & online death threats to the DA and his employees. 2/

Last night, I was searching online for a segment in which I discussed being Jewish. Instead, I stumbled on a sub-Reddit in which a bunch of men were discussing me as “zaftig” or “thicc.” 1/ Now that I have an on-air job, I’ve become accustomed to what viewers and readers say about my work. Depending on who you ask, I am alternately brilliant and stupid, shrill and soft-spoken, too wide-eyed and overly jaded. Mostly, I try to put my head down and just work. 2/

NEW: In a new opinion tonight, Judge Aileen Cannon denies a motion to dismiss the Mar-a-Lago docs case due to alleged pleading deficiencies in the obstruction and false statement charges of the indictment. But there's a sweetener for Trump and his campaign chief Susie Wiles. 1/ And that sweetener was her decision to strike paragraph 36 of the indictment, which concerns Trump's alleged showing, while at Bedminster, a classified map of a country with "an ongoing military operation" "not going well" to a "PAC Representative" reported to be Wiles. 2/

The point @annabower is making here is worth further thought. Trump and some of his better-known acolytes will avoid further proceedings well into next year, but there are several other defendants — none of them household names — against whom the case continues. 1/

https://twitter.com/annabower/status/1798460136522211429

The people who will pay most immediately for their loyalty are, unsurprisingly, some of the least well equipped to do so. Sycophancy has a price—and it is carried by the foot soldiers, not the sergeants.

NEW: Through an order today, Judge Aileen Cannon has now ordered at least 1.5 days of hearings on Trump's argument that Special Counsel Jack Smith was unlawfully appointed, and therefore, the entire indictment must be dismissed. 1/

gov.uscourts.flsd.648652.605.0.pdf ()courtlistener.com But Smith's own motion to modify Trump's bail conditions to ensure the safety of law enforcement agents involved in the investigation and prosecution of the Mar-a-Lago docs case? That will get a couple of hours at most on 6/24. 2/

NEW: Wisconsin AG Josh Kaul’s criminal complaint against Ken Chesebro, Trump lawyer Jim Troupis, and Trump campaign staffer Mike Roman is the fifth state criminal case centered on efforts to overturn the 2020 election. But it’s different in a few key ways. 1/ Among them is footnote 5, which notes that Chesebro participated in a December 2023 interview — which does not appear to have been anything other than voluntary — with WI investigators. Was that interview supposed to be a prelude to cooperation? 2/

NEW: Tonight, concerned that Trump’s escalating rhetoric about the standard instructions attached to the MAL search warrant will result in violence against law enforcement, the Special Counsel’s office is asking not for a gag order, but to modify Trump’s conditions of release. 1/

storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco… That matters because when Trump was first indicted, his bond — which he signed — made clear that his continued release was conditioned on his compliance with certain terms. 2/

NEW: When Michael Cohen testified in the New York attorney general’s civil fraud trial on 10/24 and 10/25/23, he testified that in pleading guilty to federal tax evasion charges, he had lied to spare his family. But asked about that episode Tuesday, Cohen was more nuanced. 1/ Specifically, Cohen acknowledged that in October, he testified he lied in federal court when he pleaded guilty to tax evasion and bank fraud. 2/

NEW: In August 2018, Michael Cohen pleaded guilty to causing American Media’s unlawful campaign contribution to Trump and to making an unlawful contribution of his own through the Karen McDougal and Stormy Daniels payments respectively. 1/ And during his plea allocution — the process by which a pleading defendant takes responsibility for his crimes — Cohen said he acted not only “in coordination with” but “at the direction of” one Donald Trump. 2/

NEW: At the end of today's abbreviated court day, Team Trump and the DA's office squared off about the most glaringly absent witness: former Trump Org. CFO (and two-time convict) Allen Weisselberg. 1/ By charging Weisselberg with perjury in connection with his testimony in the New York AG's civil fraud case, the DA basically made Weisselberg's testimony in this case a non-starter, leaving Cohen unrebutted, even if still vulnerable on cross, with respect to critical events. 2/

I’ve heard a number of people refer to the Stormy Daniels testimony as “graphic,” and as a person who embarrasses easily, that’s not how I experienced it. 1/ Yes, there was a stray detail that I expect prosecutors and the defense alike wish she hadn’t said. But her description of the sexual encounter itself was brief and largely devoid of details. 2/

NEW: The ongoing Trump criminal trial is the fourth Trump trial in the last 12 months—and it’s my fourth too. And after watching dozens of witnesses, I’m afraid the more they change, the more things stay the same. 1/ I’ve watched a nearly 80-year-old E. Jean Carroll, who successfully accused Trump of sexual assault and defamation, fend off the implication that she was lying because she never called the police and didn’t tell her story for two decades plus. 2/

NEW: How do you prove a defendant caused others to make false business records where those with direct knowledge of his intent and involvement are limited to the defendant, a man now in jail for perjury, and Michael Cohen? 1/ You surround Michael Cohen’s expected testimony with a mountain of circumstantial evidence, an already substantial pile to which prosecutors just added excerpts from Trump’s books How to Get Rich and Think Like a Billionaire. 2/

NEW: If Stormy Daniels is indeed today’s first witness, it’s worthwhile to ask why — in a falsification of business records case — the jury needs to hear from her. Here’s one take: 1/ The prosecution has offered significant (& often direct) evidence of the conspiracy to bury Stormy and Karen McDougal’s stories. But now they have to convince jurors why Trump himself cared enough both to conceal their stories and cover up the Stormy settlement. 2/

NEW: Former Trump Org. comptroller Jeff McConney is now off the stand, but the centerpiece of his direct examination wasn't even something he said. It was handwriting he recognized, specifically that of Allen Weisselberg, on this doc: It's Weisselberg's handwriting on the left, McConney testified, in which Weisselberg sketched out the plan to repay Cohen = $180k for the Stormy payment and another, unrelated $50k, doubled to "gross up" Cohen for tax purposes, and with another $60k on the top for a "bonus."

Happy Monday, friends, from Courtroom 1530 (aka the Trump criminal trial). Today, we'll not only leave Hope's tears, but more broadly, I expect we'll also move on from the alleged underlying conspiracy to the alleged falsification of business records. 1/ While trial participants have been tight-lipped about who and what might come next, I am anticipating testimony that shows how the repayment scheme was developed, agreed to, & most importantly, papered, from the White House to the Trump Org. over Trump's first year in office. 2/