The special counsel's statement announcing the appeal reinforces that Cannon's ruling is out of step with other courts and that Smith isn't operating as a rogue.
The smarter people seem to be saying it’s a mixed bag. She could have dragged the case out for more months, maybe even years. Or she could have seated a jury and done a different kind of dismissal thing that isn’t appealable.
This path let’s Jack Smith appeal to the 11th circuit (I think) immediately and they’re the ones who rebutted her pretty soundly the last time she ruled on a Trump case. We can probably expect a reasonable ruling from them.
However, here’s the rub. After 11th circuit or whatever has their say Trump can appeal to the Supreme Court. In their recent Presidential Immunity ruling there was a long response by Clarence Thomas that included a section questioning the legality of Jack Smith’s appointment. Which is the same reasoning Cannon gives in her ruling. It’s pretty clear that Thomas was signalling that he would rule in favor of Trump for that same reason if/when an appeal got to him.
It’s not clear whether the rest of the conservatives on the court agree with Thomas but it all suggests this will go to the Supreme Court and at least one member has already signalled how they would rule. For the time being, Trump continues to prove that he is, in fact, above the law.
In their recent Presidential Immunity ruling there was a long response by Clarence Thomas that included a section questioning the legality of Jack Smith’s appointment. Which is the same reasoning Cannon gives in her ruling.
The dissenting opinion in their recent Chevron Deference ruling criticises Thomas and others for using this tactics repeatedly to overturn laws they don’t like. They write opinions about one thing but include a bunch of questions about something only tangentially related. Then they’ll suddenly take up a case that seems to centre exactly around that question they had. A case that was only filed after the initial ruling.
Cannon using Thomas’ words is no mistake. It’s the way these judges have been legislating from the bench.
I feel like the only way this dismissal makes sense is if there have been back room conversations between Cannon and SCOTUS indicating that there is a majority to overturn any 11th circuit ruling. Cannon wouldn’t have dismissed unless the outcome was in some way guaranteed because the outcome of seating a jury, then dismissing was absolutely guaranteed.
They are both Federalist Society puppets. It likely wasn’t even a back room deal, they probably all went out to dinner and laughed about doing this corrupt shit out in the open.
The smarter people seem to be saying it’s a mixed bag. She could have dragged the case out for more months, maybe even years. Or she could have seated a jury and done a different kind of dismissal thing that isn’t appealable.
This path let’s Jack Smith appeal to the 11th circuit (I think) immediately and they’re the ones who rebutted her pretty soundly the last time she ruled on a Trump case. We can probably expect a reasonable ruling from them.
However, here’s the rub. After 11th circuit or whatever has their say Trump can appeal to the Supreme Court. In their recent Presidential Immunity ruling there was a long response by Clarence Thomas that included a section questioning the legality of Jack Smith’s appointment. Which is the same reasoning Cannon gives in her ruling. It’s pretty clear that Thomas was signalling that he would rule in favor of Trump for that same reason if/when an appeal got to him.
It’s not clear whether the rest of the conservatives on the court agree with Thomas but it all suggests this will go to the Supreme Court and at least one member has already signalled how they would rule. For the time being, Trump continues to prove that he is, in fact, above the law.
The dissenting opinion in their recent Chevron Deference ruling criticises Thomas and others for using this tactics repeatedly to overturn laws they don’t like. They write opinions about one thing but include a bunch of questions about something only tangentially related. Then they’ll suddenly take up a case that seems to centre exactly around that question they had. A case that was only filed after the initial ruling.
Cannon using Thomas’ words is no mistake. It’s the way these judges have been legislating from the bench.
I feel like the only way this dismissal makes sense is if there have been back room conversations between Cannon and SCOTUS indicating that there is a majority to overturn any 11th circuit ruling. Cannon wouldn’t have dismissed unless the outcome was in some way guaranteed because the outcome of seating a jury, then dismissing was absolutely guaranteed.
They are both Federalist Society puppets. It likely wasn’t even a back room deal, they probably all went out to dinner and laughed about doing this corrupt shit out in the open.