CNN Expert Defends Supreme Court's Handling of Trump's Immunity Case
Submitted by MAGA
Posted 90 days ago
CNN Legal Expert Challenges New York Times' Criticism of Supreme Court's Handling of Trump's Immunity Case
On Friday, CNN legal expert Elie Honig offered a counter-narrative to The New York Times' latest hit piece targeting former President Donald Trump's ongoing legal battles. The Times op-ed, penned by Leah Litman, a professor at the University of Michigan Law School, cast aspersions on the Supreme Court's handling of Trump's immunity case and suggested that political maneuvering is at play.
Litman criticized the Supreme Court for a slow response to Trump's immunity case, claiming an unusual delay. She argued that the eight-week interval between the court's agreement to hear the case on February 28 and the scheduling of oral arguments at the end of April was excessively long, given the urgency she attributes to the case. However, her perspective overlooked the standard procedural timelines that the Court often adheres to in complex cases.
Honig, however, offered a counter-narrative that cut through Litman’s insinuations with a dose of reality. “I respectfully dissent from that view. I do not think something’s necessarily rotten or erroneous or out of the ordinary,” Honig said while addressing the timeline concerns head-on.
“Watergate was a different era. The Supreme Court just doesn’t function like that anymore. And Watergate involved a sitting president under an active criminal investigation,” he explained. Honig further argued that the court’s schedule is typical, noting that the Trump immunity case was the last one argued in the current term, and decisions often come in a flurry in late June or early July.
“Everyone relax. We are going to have this opinion within maybe tomorrow, maybe within a week, but sometime really soon.” Honig also shifted the focus to the Department of Justice, which took two and a half years to charge Trump. “If you want to vent at somebody, look at DOJ,” he said, not the Supreme Court, which is handling the case in a matter of months.
The Supreme Court is currently dominated by conservatives nominated by Republican presidents. The case involves Trump's claim that he is immune from prosecution on charges that he plotted to subvert the 2020 election. The court's decision will have significant implications for Trump's potential trial on charges related to his efforts to remain in office after losing the 2020 election and his role in the events that led to the storming of the Capitol.
As the legal battle continues, it is important to remember that the Supreme Court is an independent branch of government and should not be subject to political pressure or influence. The court's decision will be based on the law and the facts of the case, not on political considerations.
In the meantime, the American people can take comfort in the fact that the legal process is playing out as it should, with due consideration given to the complexities of the case and the importance of upholding the rule of law.
Sources:
trendingpoliticsnews.com
rumble.com
theepochtimes.com
On Friday, CNN legal expert Elie Honig offered a counter-narrative to The New York Times' latest hit piece targeting former President Donald Trump's ongoing legal battles. The Times op-ed, penned by Leah Litman, a professor at the University of Michigan Law School, cast aspersions on the Supreme Court's handling of Trump's immunity case and suggested that political maneuvering is at play.
Litman criticized the Supreme Court for a slow response to Trump's immunity case, claiming an unusual delay. She argued that the eight-week interval between the court's agreement to hear the case on February 28 and the scheduling of oral arguments at the end of April was excessively long, given the urgency she attributes to the case. However, her perspective overlooked the standard procedural timelines that the Court often adheres to in complex cases.
Honig, however, offered a counter-narrative that cut through Litman’s insinuations with a dose of reality. “I respectfully dissent from that view. I do not think something’s necessarily rotten or erroneous or out of the ordinary,” Honig said while addressing the timeline concerns head-on.
“Watergate was a different era. The Supreme Court just doesn’t function like that anymore. And Watergate involved a sitting president under an active criminal investigation,” he explained. Honig further argued that the court’s schedule is typical, noting that the Trump immunity case was the last one argued in the current term, and decisions often come in a flurry in late June or early July.
“Everyone relax. We are going to have this opinion within maybe tomorrow, maybe within a week, but sometime really soon.” Honig also shifted the focus to the Department of Justice, which took two and a half years to charge Trump. “If you want to vent at somebody, look at DOJ,” he said, not the Supreme Court, which is handling the case in a matter of months.
The Supreme Court is currently dominated by conservatives nominated by Republican presidents. The case involves Trump's claim that he is immune from prosecution on charges that he plotted to subvert the 2020 election. The court's decision will have significant implications for Trump's potential trial on charges related to his efforts to remain in office after losing the 2020 election and his role in the events that led to the storming of the Capitol.
As the legal battle continues, it is important to remember that the Supreme Court is an independent branch of government and should not be subject to political pressure or influence. The court's decision will be based on the law and the facts of the case, not on political considerations.
In the meantime, the American people can take comfort in the fact that the legal process is playing out as it should, with due consideration given to the complexities of the case and the importance of upholding the rule of law.
Sources:
trendingpoliticsnews.com
rumble.com
theepochtimes.com
Latest News