Tangerine's position here is transparently unhinged from any legal principle of federalism. It is -- in a word -- BONKERS. [That's a term of art, BTW.] Updated on 09.06.2024 -- Judge Merchan will act with discretion, but will resolutely sentence Trump come November 26, 2024, now. Nothing can stop that. So, it is all a nothing burger, to wait past election day -- as the Supremes have no say on his sentence, under state law, for predicate acts long prior to his holding ANY elected office. End updated portion.
Tangerine thinks he can achieve a CIVIL "removal" of a case he's already chosen to take to trial, a felony case, in New York, and on which he's seen convictions by a jury of his peers on all 34 felonies. . . all, well-over a year past the deadline for making such a "permissive" civil motion.
Federal courts, as the able NY AG explains to the Second Circuit this morning, are loath to disturb concluded criminal outcomes in ANY state court -- where the only ongoing matter is the felon's sentence (he has a federal right of habeas corpus, to the extent he's ever ultimately unjustly jailed, under state law -- but he must exhaust all other state level remedies first -- hasn't happened!):
. . .This Court and the Supreme Court have repeatedly recognized the "strong judicial policy against federal interference with state criminal proceedings." Arizona v. Manypenny, 451 U.S. 232, 243 (1981); see also O'Shea v. Littleton, 414 U.S. 488, 500 (1974) (federal courts may not engage in "an ongoing federal audit of state criminal proceedings"), Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 41 (1971) (describing "the national policy forbidding federal courts to stay or enjoin pending state court proceedings"); Disability Rights NY v. New York, 916 F.3d 129, 133 (2d Cir. 2019) ("Federal courts must abstain where a party seeks to enjoin an ongoing, parallel state criminal proceeding.").
It would be extraordinarily disruptive and disrespectful to a "co-equal sovereign," Diamond "D" Construction Corp. v. McGowan, 282 F.3d 191, 198 (2d Cir. 2002), for this Court to enjoin the final stages of a state criminal proceeding that has already proceeded to a jury verdict and is awaiting only post-verdict rulings and sentencing. . . .
These papers from Team Tangerine are so laughably bad, as to the claim of any legal leg to stand on... or any other matter, in fact -- I won't link them. I'll never show them.
These chuckleheads pretend that a common felon at state law may "jump the line" and force the Supreme Court to hear his pleas (regardless of their speciousness). Pleas of a man who (as of the time of the predicate acts on which he was convicted) had never held elective office at any level in his life.
There is no such right, and our federalism doctrines -- embedded in the US Constitution -- have made this clear for two centuries. Nope. He can appeal in state court, AFTER sentencing -- but not before. And he doesn't get into federal court until the highest final court in New York State upholds his sentence.
But in the mean time, like all other crooks. . . he must start serving his time -- whatever that turns out to be (from Judge Merchan) in about two weeks now. Perhaps the most silly of Trump's claims is that he enjoyed immunity for actions he took while simply RUNNING for President, in 2016. Things he absolutely did ONLY as a private citizen and candidate. Nothing in Roberts' opinion even hinted that private citizens get immunity simply by filing to RUN for office.
Can you imagine?! Capone, Manson, Dalhmer, Gacy, Sirhan-Sirhan, James Earl Ray, Madoff, Milken and SBF would all have ABSOLUTELY filed to run for President -- as would have (undoubtedly hundreds of thousands of others!) including one Martin Shkreli. Hilarious. No, he was a private citizen back then when he falsified his business records, to pay off an adult film star, in secret -- away from the watchful eyes of the FEC.
D A M N.
नमस्ते
No comments:
Post a Comment