ST Alpha - "That was the expectation after the argument but if you think about it it was the opposite, right?" (Reading a Post)

SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ

Down to Post

Backboards:

Posts: 158

In response to "The Vance case definitely was stronger based on my layman read. -- nm*" by ty97

That was the expectation after the argument but if you think about it it was the opposite, right?

Posted by JackDawson (aka dawson) Jul 9 '20, 07:26

The idea that any dinky state prosecutor can subpoena a sitting presdient is remarkable, new law, and has quite far reaching implications about the federalist balance

a house subpoena does not seem so disruptive or unprecedented

they just didn't lvoe this overbraod subpoena

In my legal mind, the Vance case is far more precedential and important and before the argument the one with riskier outlook in my view

Responses:

Hmmm, interesting. - ty97 Jul 9, 07:28
It also means that the next President can be harassed by a state prosecutor in Mississippi trying to win re-election, right? -- nm - spamlet Jul 9, 07:28 4
- Thanks for tipping our hand, dude. -- nm - GOP Jul 9, 07:34
- on the other hand, the SCOTUS said unanimously in Clinton v. Jones that a president can be forced to sit for a civil deposition in a civil lawsuit whi - JackDawson Jul 9, 07:30
- Yup. -- nm - JackDawson Jul 9, 07:29
- Yeah, this was my immediate thought. Will become a new thing for local DAs of one party to harass the President perhaps -- nm - ty97 Jul 9, 07:29

Post a message top

That was the expectation after the argument but if you think about it it was the opposite, right?

Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.