The unprecedented judgment against Trump is “probably unconstitutional” … probably!!!??? Seriously! If the Supreme Court had any reason to show they really hold to their oath to support the Constitution, they would take an unprecedented course of action and immediately intercede to stop this BLATANT violation of the 8th Amendment to the …
The unprecedented judgment against Trump is “probably unconstitutional” … probably!!!??? Seriously! If the Supreme Court had any reason to show they really hold to their oath to support the Constitution, they would take an unprecedented course of action and immediately intercede to stop this BLATANT violation of the 8th Amendment to the Constitution. Otherwise we may all be ensured the out of control government thugs will undoubtedly come after every person who dares to stand up for truth, freedom and justice.
They already have with what happened on J6. What the majority of these people have endured and continue to do so under this regime should scare the waddin out of everyone!
I'm confused as to how any of this is legal. Isn't there some malicious prosecution or cruel and unusual punishment statutes(s) that all of this runs counter to? I mean Hochul and Letitia both publicly stated they were going after Trump just to go after Trump. That they'd find a reason to prosecute him. How is that legal? Hochul told the world that no one else had to worry about this happening to them b/c they were just going after Trump. "You didn't do anything different than anyone else, but we're going to prosecute you and only you" seems illegal to me. And really politically dumb. If they do start seizing assets, he's only going to become MORE popular than he already is.
Yeah, the problem is that Trump's lawyers have to PROVE it... in front of the judges in the state he is being prosecuted in. Failing that, he has to go through the whole process until he gets to the Supreme Court (if he can), and try to prove it there.
Honestly it might get solved faster if the selective treatment turns public opinion so strongly that Congress gets packed with MAGA candidates and impeaches misbehaving officials or passes new laws to fix it.
AMEN!! I’ve been screaming that this corruption of our judicial system (& the other Soros AG cases harassing Trump bc he’s Trump) is not being stopped somehow.
Can they do that? This judgment is in NY state, and it’s a civil case. Does the SC have any jurisdiction here? (I really have no idea, I’m just asking questions).
Article VI of the Constitution, 2nd paragraph: “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” The word “notwithstanding” is easier understood when it is separate into its three parts: not with standing; or in other words any state constitution, law, regulation or judicial ruling not in pursuance of the Constitution is illegal and must be struck down, not allowed to stand.
You are correct. The SC cannot “interceded”. There’s process for getting to the SC through a series of lower court decisions and appeals. It takes years.
The system is flawed. The administration of justice should always be speedy. Even more so as we witness unprecedented events of permanent consequence injurious to our Republic and the rule of law. Hypothetically, when a sitting President conspires with politically aligned state officials to take unjust actions to bankrupt and jail his political opponent, is it right to patiently wait as it slowly makes it way through the state courts, the federal appeal courts and then hope the case eventually make it to the Supreme Court while the entire system of government gets destroyed?
You, me, and Chat GPT agree! “As an AI, I cannot provide real-time information or updates on specific legal cases or events beyond my last training data in January 2022. Therefore, I cannot confirm the accuracy or details of the scenario you mentioned involving Judge Engoran and Donald Trump.
However, I can offer a general perspective. If a judge were to impose a fine of $450 million in a fraud case where there were no victims, the constitutionality of such a fine would likely be subject to legal scrutiny. The 8th Amendment of the United States Constitution prohibits the imposition of ‘excessive fines.’”
The Supreme Court isn't allowed to intercede. They have to wait for a petition for certiorari. I agree it's at least an Eighth Amendment issue because of the excessive amount.
The unprecedented judgment against Trump is “probably unconstitutional” … probably!!!??? Seriously! If the Supreme Court had any reason to show they really hold to their oath to support the Constitution, they would take an unprecedented course of action and immediately intercede to stop this BLATANT violation of the 8th Amendment to the Constitution. Otherwise we may all be ensured the out of control government thugs will undoubtedly come after every person who dares to stand up for truth, freedom and justice.
They already have with what happened on J6. What the majority of these people have endured and continue to do so under this regime should scare the waddin out of everyone!
I'm confused as to how any of this is legal. Isn't there some malicious prosecution or cruel and unusual punishment statutes(s) that all of this runs counter to? I mean Hochul and Letitia both publicly stated they were going after Trump just to go after Trump. That they'd find a reason to prosecute him. How is that legal? Hochul told the world that no one else had to worry about this happening to them b/c they were just going after Trump. "You didn't do anything different than anyone else, but we're going to prosecute you and only you" seems illegal to me. And really politically dumb. If they do start seizing assets, he's only going to become MORE popular than he already is.
Yeah, the problem is that Trump's lawyers have to PROVE it... in front of the judges in the state he is being prosecuted in. Failing that, he has to go through the whole process until he gets to the Supreme Court (if he can), and try to prove it there.
Honestly it might get solved faster if the selective treatment turns public opinion so strongly that Congress gets packed with MAGA candidates and impeaches misbehaving officials or passes new laws to fix it.
AMEN!! I’ve been screaming that this corruption of our judicial system (& the other Soros AG cases harassing Trump bc he’s Trump) is not being stopped somehow.
I’m no legal beagle but surely…….
Can they do that? This judgment is in NY state, and it’s a civil case. Does the SC have any jurisdiction here? (I really have no idea, I’m just asking questions).
Article VI of the Constitution, 2nd paragraph: “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” The word “notwithstanding” is easier understood when it is separate into its three parts: not with standing; or in other words any state constitution, law, regulation or judicial ruling not in pursuance of the Constitution is illegal and must be struck down, not allowed to stand.
You are correct. The SC cannot “interceded”. There’s process for getting to the SC through a series of lower court decisions and appeals. It takes years.
The system is flawed. The administration of justice should always be speedy. Even more so as we witness unprecedented events of permanent consequence injurious to our Republic and the rule of law. Hypothetically, when a sitting President conspires with politically aligned state officials to take unjust actions to bankrupt and jail his political opponent, is it right to patiently wait as it slowly makes it way through the state courts, the federal appeal courts and then hope the case eventually make it to the Supreme Court while the entire system of government gets destroyed?
You, me, and Chat GPT agree! “As an AI, I cannot provide real-time information or updates on specific legal cases or events beyond my last training data in January 2022. Therefore, I cannot confirm the accuracy or details of the scenario you mentioned involving Judge Engoran and Donald Trump.
However, I can offer a general perspective. If a judge were to impose a fine of $450 million in a fraud case where there were no victims, the constitutionality of such a fine would likely be subject to legal scrutiny. The 8th Amendment of the United States Constitution prohibits the imposition of ‘excessive fines.’”
The Supreme Court isn't allowed to intercede. They have to wait for a petition for certiorari. I agree it's at least an Eighth Amendment issue because of the excessive amount.
I just said these same words to my husband! Where are they? On break???