HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Trump to Appeal Ruling on...

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 07:18 PM

Trump to Appeal Ruling on Vance Subpoena to Supreme Court

Source: Bloomberg

President Donald Trump’s lawyers told a judge they’ll ask the U.S. Supreme Court next week to block a subpoena from the Manhattan district attorney seeking his tax filings and other financial records.

Lawyers representing Trump and District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. said in a joint letter Friday that Trump will ask for high court review by Thursday and both sides will file legal arguments by Nov. 25, setting up a possibility of finding out quickly whether the Supreme Court will hear the case.

If the court declines, that could clear the way for Trump’s accountants, Mazars USA LLP, to begin turning documents over to Vance’s office as early as next month.

The move comes at the end of a week that saw the federal appeals court in New York reject Trump’s argument that he has broad immunity from criminal investigation. The panel ruled 3-0 that Trump can’t block the grand jury subpoena.

Read more: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-11-08/trump-to-appeal-ruling-on-d-a-s-tax-subpoena-to-supreme-court?cmpid=socialflow-twitter-business&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_content=business&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social

29 replies, 3084 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 29 replies Author Time Post
Reply Trump to Appeal Ruling on Vance Subpoena to Supreme Court (Original post)
brooklynite Nov 8 OP
maxsolomon Nov 8 #1
Evolve Dammit Nov 8 #2
Tom Yossarian Joad Nov 8 #3
Mc Mike Nov 8 #4
bucolic_frolic Nov 8 #5
jberryhill Nov 8 #11
BigmanPigman Nov 8 #16
meow2u3 Nov 8 #6
bucolic_frolic Nov 8 #7
meow2u3 Nov 8 #12
bucolic_frolic Nov 8 #17
Moosepoop Nov 8 #25
regnaD kciN Nov 8 #26
cstanleytech Nov 8 #8
jberryhill Nov 8 #10
regnaD kciN Nov 8 #27
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Nov 8 #9
Orrex Nov 8 #13
llmart Nov 8 #15
Kaiserguy Nov 8 #20
Orrex Nov 8 #24
lastlib Nov 9 #29
llmart Nov 8 #14
Pepsidog Nov 8 #18
Alwaysna Nov 8 #19
Roy Rolling Nov 8 #21
DallasNE Nov 8 #22
NoMoreRepugs Nov 8 #23
Snackshack Nov 8 #28

Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 07:22 PM

1. Here we go!

Is the Constitution dead, or not? Has McConnell succeeded in killing it?

Tune in next month!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 07:32 PM

2. I gotta have the Supremes. My Supremes. Mine. All mine. Only the best. MAGA!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 07:33 PM

3. I hope, I hope, I hope, I hope, I hope, I hope, I hope, I hope

the tell Trump's boys to go packing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 07:33 PM

4. You can tell how innocent he is, by how he covers everything up about all his actions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 07:36 PM

5. Let's see what side the states' rights conservatives are on this time

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bucolic_frolic (Reply #5)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 07:52 PM

11. Always a good setup

But they generally choose “hypocritical bastards”.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #11)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 08:54 PM

16. Correction: Hypocritical, greedy bastards!

My dad always described the GOP in those words. I miss my dad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 07:37 PM

6. He's going to have to get past RBG first

and I doubt she'll take the case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to meow2u3 (Reply #6)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 07:45 PM

7. is THAT the way this works?

Each SP Justice has a region for emergency appeals, and NY is RBG? And they can accept or decline, one justice, one and done?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bucolic_frolic (Reply #7)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 07:54 PM

12. AFAIK, it's known as a writ of certorari, or cert for short

Info straight from SCOTUS web site:

https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/supreme-1

The SCOTUS justice in charge of the appeals court circuit doesn't have to take the case; he or she can deny cert if the case has no merit.

https://ballotpedia.org/Certiorari

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to meow2u3 (Reply #12)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 08:55 PM

17. Yes, thanks for the posting, that's what I thought I had read somewhere, but

it's still the SCOTUS ruling on a Manhattan subpoena

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to meow2u3 (Reply #12)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 10:51 PM

25. It is not up to one justice. It takes 4 of the 9 voting to hear the case.

From your link: https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/supreme-1

Writs of Certiorari

Parties who are not satisfied with the decision of a lower court must petition the U.S. Supreme Court to hear their case. The primary means to petition the court for review is to ask it to grant a writ of certiorari. This is a request that the Supreme Court order a lower court to send up the record of the case for review. The Court usually is not under any obligation to hear these cases, and it usually only does so if the case could have national significance, might harmonize conflicting decisions in the federal Circuit courts, and/or could have precedential value. In fact, the Court accepts 100-150 of the more than 7,000 cases that it is asked to review each year. Typically, the Court hears cases that have been decided in either an appropriate U.S. Court of Appeals or the highest Court in a given state (if the state court decided a Constitutional issue).

The Supreme Court has its own set of rules. According to these rules, four of the nine Justices must vote to accept a case. Five of the nine Justices must vote in order to grant a stay, e.g., a stay of execution in a death penalty case. Under certain instances, one Justice may grant a stay pending review by the entire Court.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Moosepoop (Reply #25)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 10:57 PM

26. Well, we KNOW four will vote to take the case...

Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh are all solidly in Trump’s pocket. The only question is if, when the case is heard, Roberts joins them or not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 07:47 PM

8. Wait, isnt this the state seeking the records for state purposes? Hardly seems like an issue for the

Federal courts to be involved in then as its a state issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cstanleytech (Reply #8)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 07:50 PM

10. This is a federal suit seeking an injunction and brought by Trump


Trump brought a federal suit to stop enforcement of a state subpoena on the ground of a claimed federal right to immunity from process.

Whether state law enforcement actions violate the Constitution is always a matter for the federal courts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cstanleytech (Reply #8)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 10:58 PM

27. It isn't...

Just like the Florida recount in 2000.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 07:47 PM

9. He has beer bong Brett on his side

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 08:33 PM

13. I am desperate to wake one morning to the news that that stupid motherfucker is dead

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #13)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 08:40 PM

15. +1000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #13)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 09:12 PM

20. Which one Idiot President or Beer Boy

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaiserguy (Reply #20)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 10:49 PM

24. Well...

¿por qué no los dos?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaiserguy (Reply #20)

Sat Nov 9, 2019, 04:33 AM

29. Yes.

eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 08:40 PM

14. So what is he afraid the public will find out?

He certainly goes to great extremes to keep his financial records secret. Must be some real juicy criminal actions in those records.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 09:00 PM

18. SCOTUS better not touch this case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 09:04 PM

19. Trump covers up his crap better than most cats!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 09:20 PM

21. He Can Ask

The Supreme Court will probably just ignore him. They aren’t even obligated to hear his case, it’s such a slam dunk.

But if they don’t ignore him, it’ll be more names added to the impeachment list of Trump, Pence, Barr, and more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 09:22 PM

22. My Guess Is That SCOTUS Will

Decline to hear the case which will mean 8 years of Trump taxes will be released. And it means the Justices aren't on record for how they voted and isn't that the whole purpose?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 09:38 PM

23. tRUMP doesn't understand that if SCOTUS rules in his favor on the many appeals he might file with

them they become precedent and will apply to FUTURE DEMOCRATIC Presidents as well - something the Rethuglicans could never bear to happen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 11:54 PM

28. If SCOTUS...

Decides to even hear the case the Constitution is over and America as we have known it is gone.

If the Supreme Court is truely still an unbiased arbiter of justice it will decline to hear the case period.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread