SCOTUS is now 'judicial arm of the Republican Party' after 'ludicrous' Trump decision: column
The Supreme Court of the United States' (SCOTUS) recent decision to hear former President Donald Trump's argument for absolute broad presidential immunity later this spring has thoroughly tarnished the Court's reputation and credibility, according to Daily Beast columnist David Rothkopf.
In a Friday essay for the Beast, Rothkopf made the case that the Court is actually the one branch of government that has been most thoroughly tainted by the far right — even more than Congress and the White House. He specified that the Court issuing a writ of certiorari (in which four justices agree to add a case to the SCOTUS' docket) on Trump's "ludicrous" and "anti-Constitutional" immunity bid should be viewed in the same context as other decisions by the Roberts Court that have overwhelmingly benefited the extreme right.
"Cases like Citizens United (granting the rich more influence in elections), Shelby County (undermining voting rights), Heller (expanding gun rights), Bruen (striking down sensible gun controls), Dobbs (overturning Roe v. Wade), and Students for Fair Admissions (gutting affirmative action) are just a few of the notable examples of their service to their benefactors and their political agenda," Rothkopf wrote.
READ MORE: Jack Smith just tore apart Trump's 'startling' absolute immunity argument
"The Court’s decision to hear the Trump immunity case was outrageous, legally indefensible, and handled procedurally in a way that made it clear they were no longer acting as a court, but rather as the judicial arm of the Republican Party," he continued.
SCOTUS granting cert to Trump means that a verdict in the former president's criminal trial in Washington, DC for alleged election interference may not come before the November election. Even though it's only March, oral arguments won't happen until April 22, and the Court has until the end of its term in late June to issue a decision.
Even if it eventually ruled in Department of Justice special counsel Jack Smith's favor, US District Judge Tanya Chutkan has previously promised she would allow both the prosecution and the defense up to three months to prepare for a trial. This means that if Trump's immunity appeal is denied in May or June, the trial may not begin until late August or early September. And the trial itself may take two to three months before the jury deliberates to decide on a verdict. And even if he's convicted, the former president would likely appeal a guilty verdict, kicking the can even further down the road before he's actually sentenced. Rothkopf called the scenario a "dark irony" in that justices "have chosen to hear the Department of Justice’s case against Donald Trump for election interference in a way that is itself election interference."
"Forcing delay was a conscious choice. They did not have to," Rothkopf wrote, emphasizing that SCOTUS could have granted Jack Smith's earlier request to bypass the DC Circuit Court of Appeals and decide on the immunity question in December. "They thereby increased the likelihood that Trump, who appointed three of the justices on the court, would win in November—and then end all the cases against him for his abuses of power."
READ MORE: Chutkan slams Trump in latest ruling rejecting immunity argument: No 'divine right of kings'
"In other words, Clarence Thomas and his right-wing colleagues have picked up where the mob his wife helped support left off on Jan. 6," he added.
Click here to read Rothkopf's essay in full (subscription required).
