Digest

This episode of Prosecuting Donald Trump dives into the legal fallout of the Supreme Court's decision regarding presidential immunity in the January 6th case. The hosts, Andrew Weissman and Mary McCord, discuss the decision's impact on the ongoing case, including Judge Chutkan's denial of Trump's motions to dismiss based on immunity, selective prosecution, and vindictive prosecution. They also analyze the implications of the decision for other individuals involved in the January 6th events, such as Jeffrey Clark and Jenna Ellis. The hosts address listener questions about the potential for impeachment proceedings and the impact of the decision on voting rights and sentencing in the Manhattan case. They also discuss the composition of the Supreme Court and the importance of diverse perspectives on the court.

Outlines

00:00:00

Legal Battles and MSNBC Premium

The podcast hosts, Andrew Weissman and Mary McCord, introduce the episode and discuss the ongoing legal and political news surrounding Donald Trump. They also announce a new subscription offering on Apple Podcasts called MSNBC Premium, which provides ad-free episodes and exclusive bonus content.

00:02:15

Supreme Court Immunity Decision and its Fallout

The hosts discuss the Supreme Court's decision to send the January 6th case back to the DC Circuit Court, which immediately returned it to Judge Chutkan. They analyze the next steps in the case, including Judge Chutkan's scheduling order and her denial of Trump's selective and vindictive prosecution motion.

00:06:39

Judge Chutkan's Decision and Pending Motions

The hosts delve into the details of Judge Chutkan's decision, highlighting her denial of various motions to dismiss, including those based on immunity, constitutional grounds, and statutory grounds. They explain the significance of these decisions and their implications for the case moving forward.

00:09:50

Selective and Vindictive Prosecution Arguments

The hosts provide a detailed explanation of the legal concepts of selective and vindictive prosecution, outlining the requirements for a defendant to successfully raise these arguments. They discuss Judge Chutkan's reasoning for denying Trump's motion on these grounds, emphasizing the lack of evidence and the improper reframing of the indictment.

00:16:35

Implications for Other Individuals

The hosts discuss Jeffrey Clark's attempt to invoke the Supreme Court's immunity decision in his own bar disciplinary proceedings and Jenna Ellis' cooperation agreement with the Arizona Attorney General in the case against fraudulent electors. They analyze the potential implications of the Supreme Court's decision for other individuals involved in the January 6th events.

00:34:54

Listener Questions and Impeachment

The hosts address listener questions, including one about the impact of the Supreme Court's immunity decision on impeachment proceedings. They argue that the decision does not eliminate the possibility of impeachment and that the political remedy remains available, albeit difficult in the current political climate.

00:38:18

Voting Rights, Sentencing, and Supreme Court Composition

The hosts discuss the legal implications of Donald Trump's conviction in the Manhattan case for voting rights and sentencing. They explain that under Florida law, Trump would likely be allowed to vote in the November election, even if he is convicted and sentenced. They also address the issue of retroactivity and why Judge Mershon postponed sentencing until after the Supreme Court's immunity decision. They also address a listener question about the composition of the Supreme Court and whether it could function effectively with nine childless cat ladies. They acknowledge the listener's humorous perspective and highlight the importance of diverse perspectives on the court.

Keywords

Q&A

• Does the Supreme Court's immunity decision eliminate the possibility of accountability through impeachment proceedings?

  No, the Supreme Court's decision does not eliminate the possibility of impeachment. The decision is based on the notion that there is a political remedy for presidential misconduct, which is impeachment. However, the current political climate makes impeachment a difficult and unlikely path to accountability.

• Why did Judge Mershon postpone sentencing in the Manhattan case until after the Supreme Court's immunity decision?

  Judge Mershon postponed sentencing because the Supreme Court's immunity decision could potentially impact the case. The decision creates a new legal framework regarding presidential immunity and the use of official act evidence. Judge Mershon is allowing for briefing on this issue to determine if and how the decision should be applied to the Manhattan case.

Show Notes