Tomorrow could be a very eventful day as appeals court hears arguments on presidential immunity

[kentuck]

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/know-appeals-court-hears-trumps-immunity-claim-election-interference-c-rcna132356

(snip)

In August, a federal grand jury in Washington indicted Trump on four charges: conspiracy to defraud the U.S.; conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding; obstruction; and conspiracy against the right to vote and to have one’s vote counted. Trump pleaded not guilty.

Washington-based U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is presiding over the case, wants the trial to go ahead in March, which would allow it to be concluded well before the election, but Trump’s appeal threatens that timeline unless courts act quickly.

(snip)
The court is hearing the case on an expedited schedule, so a ruling could come quickly. Whatever happens, the losing party is likely to immediately appeal to the Supreme Court. The justices would then face a decision on whether to take up the case and issue their own ruling, potentially also on a fast-tracked basis.

But the Supreme Court is not required to take up the case and could simply leave the appeals court ruling in place. If Trump loses the appeal and the Supreme Court declines to hear his case, then the trial could still move forward quickly.

[gab13by13]

1. What matters is the decision on the stay,

no way in hell will any court grant presidents the divine right of kings.

[LiberalFighter]

2. That needs to be stressed over and over about presidents not having divine right of kings.