How will you handle a decision on limited immunity but not explicitly saying Trump's behavior was immune / a decision to remand?

@Najawin (not a lawyer and not a final decision)

Obviously, immunity exists to some extent with official acts? That's a very well established precedent. This case is about specific actions and a specific criminal trial and whether it is covered by immunity, and I think it should probably resolve to whether he actually gets immunity for this specific trial.

@SemioticRivalry So if the case is remanded you'll resolve this how? 9-0 against?

@SemioticRivalry When will this be resolved, now that the decision is 9-0?

@SamsaraaTiger Are you thinking of the wrong case?

@simoj I don't think so. Is this Trump v. Anderson (the Colorado case) that got escalated to the Supreme Court, or some other case?

@SamsaraaTiger this is Donald j. Trump v United States, the criminal immunity case

@SemioticRivalry I am not sure what case you are talking about, somehow all I find online is this one - https://www.democracydocket.com/opinion/in-9-0-ruling-supreme-court-justices-bend-toward-trump/. If we aren't talking about the same case, hope you can send some link/source talking about Trump v. United States

@SamsaraaTiger https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/trump-v-united-states-2/

@SemioticRivalry Thanks!!

I think people are underrating Gorsuch's craziness here, or the possibility of getting ACB or Kavanaugh to sign on. Do I think it's a particularly high chance, enough to get 5 votes? No. But I think 9% for 6-3 is too low.

What is the best legal analysis you've read on this topic? I would like to know why the consensus is they will rule against Trump

@PlainBG Arguments usually play out very similarly and break on similar lines to previous rulings. It is more common for a lower court's decision to be affirmed than reversed. The lower court ruling was unanimous against Trump 3-0 between one Republican and two Democratic judges and they dismissed all of his arguments pretty directly. You can read it here: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/02/06/us/politics/trump-immunity-ruling-2020-election.html?unlocked_article_code=1.ZE0.lLPF.-DeYUVEVRNu_&smid=url-share

Considering the strong rebuke from the Circuit Court, even with a more conservative Supreme Court his arguments are probably equally as poorly received.

@PlainBG
https://reason.com/volokh/2024/02/29/the-supreme-courts-grant-in-trump-v-u-s/

"It take five votes to grant a stay, but only four to grant certiorari. Thus the lack of a stay suggests a majority of the Court may have been inclined to affirm the D.C. Circuit, even if some had concerns about the lower court's reasoning."

https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/1AC5A0E7090A350785258ABB0052D942/$file/23-3228-2039001.pdf
Here's the DC Circuit's decision. I suspect SCOTUS uses most of these arguments.

They should uphold the Circuit Court as the standard for reversing is a "clear error".

@aashiq I saw some legal commentators saying that the reasoning in the DC circuit's analysis was bad, even with the correct conclusion, and it would prompt the SC to take the case just to fix it. (I also saw some saying it was amazing and there was no reason for them to take it since DC so thoroughly demolished the case, so, you know.) So theoretically there could be some votes for taking the case on that basis? I dunno, not a constitutional law scholar. Well. Neither are most of the justices.

What if there aren’t 9 total votes (eg if a justice dies, resigns or recuses themselves)?

@lisamarsh 50/50 to the 2 closest options