Search the Community

Shocker From Top Conservative Judge: Trump Likely To Skate Completely Greg Sargent Sat, April 27, 2024 at 5:00 AM CDT·4 min read 512 “I’m profoundly disturbed about the apparent direction of the court,” J. Michael Luttig told me. “I now believe that it is unlikely Trump will ever be tried for the crimes he committed in attempting to overturn the 2020 election.” I called Luttig, a former federal judge with extensive conservative credentials, to solicit his reaction to this week’s Supreme Court hearing over Donald Trump’s demand for absolute immunity from prosecution for any crimes related to his insurrection attempt. On Thursday, Luttig posted a thread critiquing the right-wing justices for their apparent openness to Trump’s arguments—but that thread was legalistic and formal, so I figured Luttig had a lot more to say. And did he ever. Luttig lacerated the right-wing justices for harboring a “radical vision” of the American presidency, and pronounced himself “gravely” worried that Trump will never face accountability for alleged crimes committed in attempting to destroy U.S. democracy through extensive procedural corruption and the naked incitement of mob violence. Luttig’s fear that Trump may very well skate centers on the lines of questioning from the court’s right-wing majority about Special Counsel Jack Smith’s ongoing prosecution of Trump. As many observers noted, those justices appeared largely uninterested in the question before them—whether Trump’s alleged crimes related to the insurrection constituted official presidential acts that are immune from prosecution after leaving office. Instead, the justices dwelled on the supposed future consequences of prosecuting presidents for crimes, and seemed to want to place some limits on that eventuality. That suggests the justices will kick the case back to lower courts to determine whether some definition of official presidential acts must be protected (and whether Trump’s specific acts qualify). Such a move would almost certainly push Trump’s trial until after the election, and if he wins, he can simply cancel prosecutions of himself. Luttig fears that outcome. But he also worries that even if Trump loses the election, there may well be five Supreme Court votes for siding with Trump’s demand for immunity. Both outcomes would functionally end his prosecution. “I believe it is now likely either that Trump will get elected and instruct his attorney general to drop the charges, or that the Supreme Court will grant him immunity from prosecution,” Luttig told me. To be sure, some observers think that in the end, five justices will not grant Trump that immunity. In this scenario, a conservative majority could remand the case to lower courts to define official presidential acts that cannot be prosecuted, even as some combination of five or more justices later rules that Trump’s specific actions are still subject to prosecution. But Luttig fears that this may be overly optimistic. Luttig pointed out that even Chief Justice John Roberts seemed to express some sympathy for the general idea that official presidential acts should be immune from prosecution. He also noted that Justice Brett Kavanaugh praised the pardon of Richard Nixon, and that Justice Neil Gorsuch said that if presidents can be prosecuted, they might pardon themselves before leaving office to protect themselves, which Gorsuch suggested might be legitimate. Take all that together, Luttig said, and it’s not hard to see how five right-wing justices could let Trump off. Some could declare that Trump’s actions related to Jan. 6 (the pressure on his vice president to subvert the electoral count and on the Justice Department to create a fake pretext for that) constitute official acts immune from prosecution. Others might hold that the statutes Trump allegedly violated don’t offer a clear statement that they apply to presidents, Luttig said. Either way, Trump has already gotten much of what he wants with the all-but-certain delay. And the lines of questioning from the right-wing justices are already deeply alarming, Luttig argued. Justice Samuel Alito, for instance, declared that if presidents must fear prosecution after leaving office, they might prove more prone to resisting the transfer of power, destabilizing the country. That’s preposterous, as The New Republic’s Michael Tomasky noted, since there’s never been a bar on post-presidential prosecution throughout U.S. history, yet the only president to aggressively resist that transfer is Donald Trump himself. What’s more, as Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern point out at Slate, the notion also seems to suggest, absurdly, that giving presidents free rein to commit crimes in office, including attempting to destroy democracy at its very foundations, is essential to maintaining democratic stability. One might add that when the justices ruled that Trump’s insurrection does not disqualify him from the ballot, they told us that this, too, was necessary to avoid national destabilization. Mysteriously enough, a key ingredient for achieving political stability always seems to involve not holding Trump accountable. “The conservative justices’ argument for immunity assumes that Jack Smith’s prosecution of Trump is politically corrupt and seeks a rule that would prevent future presidents from corruptly prosecuting their predecessors,” Luttig said. “But such a rule would license all future presidents to commit crimes against the United States while in office with impunity,” Luttig concluded. “Which is exactly what Trump is arguing he’s entitled to do.”

https://newrepublic.com/article/181059/luttig-trump-january-6-case

Luttig should have been on SCOTUS

I don't have to refute a thing. Trump lost, and his cult (didn't know that included you) is still trying to figure out how nearly four years later. but please... refute Luttig.

https://www.theatlantic.com/author/j-michael-luttig/ do some more homework...

why did Eastman and Chesebro plead guilty in Georgia? why are they unnamed co-conspirators in the DC case brought by Jack Smith? Refute Luttig then...

I’ll trust people like conservative judge Michael Luttig over a scoundrel like Vivek.

Few conservatives left with integrity who understand the plight of the current Repugs. Outside Liz, Kinzinger. Kasich, Judge Luttig, Walsh, Jolly, and other similar conservatives there is no Repug party left - it’s a personality cult. Hopefully enough real conservatives with a spine and brains will follow their lead in 2024.

Federalist Society members say no along with several other ‘conservative’ scholars… https://x.com/rpsagainsttrump/status/1693294638218588355?s=46&t=qtfBE6Hx9UNW86ETpTlGNQ Former conservative federal judge Michael Luttig says Donald Trump should be barred from the presidency under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment: "The people who wrote the 14th Amendment were not fools. They realized that if those people who tried to overturn the country, who tried to get rid of our peaceful transitions of power, are again put in power, that would be the end of the nation, the end of democracy." https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/4155537-the-constitution-bars-trump-from-holding-public-office-ever-again/ While some ­on the right portray accountability for the Jan. 6 Capitol riot as just another partisan dispute, two prominent conservative legal scholars have made the case that the Constitution disqualifies former President Trump from public office. Last week, law professors William Baude of the University of Chicago and Michael Stokes Paulsen of the University of St. Thomas — both members of the conservative Federalist Society — argued in a law review article that Trump is already constitutionally forbidden from serving in public office because of Section Three of the 14th Amendment.

thought you said you weren't voting for Trump? do I need to go dig that post up for you? Trump owns the R party right now as anyone can plainly see. The traditional R's are too terrified to offend his Tea Party and racist base because without those nutjobs they're guaranteed to never win another election. Similar could be said of the Dems and the far left loonies. It's a math game and imo the establishment R's thought Trump would go away for 24. Boy how wrong they were. Is that a position you believe all democrats support? Just out of curiosity... https://youtu.be/v8-8WsYj9FU you're just the type of psycho Manchin, Luttig and other moderates are talking about, fyi.

to the contrary... the Dem's are pandering to everyone and their cousin and spending $ like drunken sailors on shore leave to buy votes. the R's... have been almost completely hijacked by the Tea Party, which Trump figured out how to do... to his credit. now, they've lost the moderates and aren't getting squat done. I'm more Libertarian leaning than suckling the teet of either of the Big-2 like most here regardless, Luttig is right... and has been

a healthy Republican party makes a healthy Democratic party... if you actually can listen and comprehend. dummy https://www.freedomsledder.com/index.php?/search/&q=Luttig&quick=1

shuddup Lib... I've posted more Luttig stuff on here than you've posted stupid Twitter links.

Judge Luttig is a conservatives conservative and he’s been taking about the dangers of Repugs for the better part of two years. @Crnr2Crnr you should heed his advice

I wonder if you consider yourself a 'conservative' or a 'maga' because I'm fairly certain you can't disseminate between the two at this point in time. ffwd Benny and listen to M Luttig., then ffwd Liz and listen to Luttig. the other day you posted a picture of your Ronald Reagan Tshirt, how do you feel he would react to your new prophet? I'd speculate our opinions will differ.

you're really reaching there... As I am not a republican... I'll let a lifelong republican judge explain it to you. Judge Luttig, former judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit appointed by President George H.W. Bush

you don't strike me as a coward or unwilling to listen to alternative voices, but it's abundantly clear your brain can't listen to what Luttig had to say...

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/14/opinion/electoral-count-act.html by conservative federal judge Michael Luttig

The January 6 Committee hearings backfired on Thursday when a key witness against former President Donald Trump noted that Democrats, including Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), had attempted to block the certification of past election results. But one witness, Greg Jacob, a former counsel to Pence, testified that the relevant phrase in the 12th Amendment was “inartfully worded,” which suggested room for Trump’s unusual interpretation and that of his legal adviser, John Eastman. Luttig disagreed with Jacob, saying the 12th Amendment was clear. But he added that the precedent that Trump and Eastman had used was “historical,” not legal, because Democrats, including Raskin, had objected to past elections on the same basis. “That was the centerpiece of the plan to overturn the 2020 election. It was the historical precedent, in the years, and with the vice presidents, I named, as Congressman Raskin understands well.” Jacob also noted that Democrats had tried to stop the certification of the Electoral College vote in 2000, 2004, and 2016. Among those was Raskin himself, who tried to reject Electoral College votes to declare Trump the winner in 2016. https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/06/16/watch-january-6-witness-calls-out-jamie-raskin-for-objecting-to-2016-election/

According to the White House official, the candidates include: Ray Kelly, the former and longest-serving New York City police commissioner Mike Rogers, former House Intelligence Committee chairman and former FBI agent Former Assistant Attorney General Alice Fisher Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C. Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn, R-Texas Paul Abbate, executive assistant director for the Criminal, Cyber, Response and Services Branch Associate Judge of New York Court of Appeals Mike Garcia Mayor of Colorado Springs John Suthers Former federal appellate court Judge Michael Luttig, now executive vice president of Boeing Larry Thompson, former deputy attorney general under President George W. Bush Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe

From Trumps website: Keith Blackwell is a justice of the Supreme Court of Georgia. He was appointed to the position in 2012. He had previously served on the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Before serving on the bench, Justice Blackwell was a Deputy Special Attorney General of the State of Georgia, an Assistant District Attorney in Cobb County, and a commercial litigator in private practice. Justice Blackwell is a graduate of the University of Georgia School of Law.Charles Canady is a justice of the Supreme Court of Florida. He has served in that role since 2008, and he served as the court's chief justice from 2010 to 2012. Prior to his appointment, Justice Canady served as a judge of the Florida Second District Court of Appeal and as a member of the United States House of Representatives for four terms. Justice Canady is a graduate of Yale Law School.Neil Gorsuch is a judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. He was appointed to the position in 2006. Judge Gorsuch previously served in the Justice Department as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General. Judge Gorsuch was a Marshall Scholar and received his law degree from Harvard. He clerked for Justices Byron White and Anthony Kennedy.Mike Lee is the Junior U.S. Senator from Utah and currently serves on the Senate Judiciary Committee. He has previously served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney in Utah and as a Supreme Court Clerk for Justice Alito.Edward Mansfield is a justice of the Iowa Supreme Court. He was appointed to the court in 2011 and retained by voters in 2012. Justice Mansfield previously served as a judge of the Iowa Court of Appeals. He also teaches law at Drake University as an adjunct professor. Justice Mansfield is a graduate of Yale Law School.Federico Moreno is a judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida and a member of the Judicial Conference of the United States. He previously served as a state and county court judge in Florida. Judge Moreno is a graduate of the University of Miami School of Law.Margaret A. Ryan has been a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces since 2006. Judge Ryan served in the Marine Corps through deployments in the Philippines and the Gulf War. She then attended Notre Dame Law School through a military scholarship and served as a JAG officer for four years. Judge Ryan clerked for Judge J. Michael Luttig of the Fourth Circuit and Justice Clarence Thomas.Amul Thapar is a judge of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky, serving since his appointment in 2007, when he became the first South Asian Article III judge. He has taught law students at the University of Cincinnati and Georgetown. Judge Thapar has served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney in Washington, D.C. and the Southern District of Ohio. Immediately prior to his judicial appointment, Judge Thapar was the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Kentucky. Judge Thapar received his law degree from the University of California, Berkeley.Timothy Tymkovich is the chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. Judge Tymkovich was appointed to the bench in 2003. He previously served as Colorado Solicitor General. Judge Tymkovich is a graduate of the University of Colorado College of Law.Robert Young is the chief justice of the Supreme Court of Michigan. He was appointed to the court in 1999, and became part of a majority of justices who embraced originalism and led what one scholar described as a "textualism revolution." Justice Young previously served as a judge on the Michigan Court of Appeals. Chief Justice Young is a graduate of Harvard Law School. The full list of the twenty-one individuals Mr. Trump will consider is below: 1. Keith Blackwell 2. Charles Canady 3. Steven Colloton 4. Allison Eid 5. Neil Gorsuch 6. Raymond Gruender 7. Thomas Hardiman 8. Raymond Kethledge 9. Joan Larsen 10. Mike Lee 11. Thomas Lee 12. Edward Mansfield 13. Federico Moreno 14. William Pryor 15. Margaret A. Ryan 16. Amul Thapar 17. Timothy Tymkovich 18. David Stras 19. Diane Sykes 20. Don Willett 21. Robert Young