Podcast Summary
Trump Appeals Criminal Case Ruling, Seeks Stay: Former President Trump filed an appeal and motion to stay proceedings in a criminal case, citing absolute presidential immunity, but the judge had previously ruled against it. Trump's withdrawal from the case raises legal questions.
Former President Donald Trump has taken the unprecedented step of filing a notice of appeal to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals regarding a lower court's ruling denying his motion to dismiss based on absolute presidential immunity in a federal criminal case. Simultaneously, Trump filed a motion to stay the proceedings in the district court, asserting that an interlocutory appeal requires an automatic stay and that he will no longer participate in the case without further court order. Trump's lawyers referred to him as "president" in the filing, but the Midas Touch Network does not. The judge in the case, Tanya Chutkin, had previously ruled that presidents do not possess absolute immunity for criminal behavior. Trump's actions, which some view as a unilateral withdrawal from the case, have raised legal questions and potential implications for the ongoing investigation.
Trump's team seeks stay in criminal case due to presidential immunity: Trump's legal team is arguing for a halt in his criminal case over immunity, citing a previous civil ruling. Trump refuses to participate until the issue is resolved, and the trial is set for March 2024.
Former President Donald Trump's legal team is arguing for a stay in his criminal case related to the January 6th insurrection based on the issue of absolute presidential immunity. The DC Circuit Court of Appeals previously ruled on this issue in a civil case, but Trump's team is now applying it to a criminal case. Trump has also indicated that he will not participate in the criminal case until the issue of immunity is resolved. The trial for this case is scheduled for March 2024, and jury notices have already been sent out. Trump's team is arguing that the case must be halted until the DC Circuit Court of Appeals makes a final decision on the immunity issue.
Trump's Legal Tactics to Delay DC Trial: Trump's team files motions to dismiss DC trial, not for win but to delay until appeal on immunity. Meanwhile, Beam Dream's hot cocoa aids better sleep and overall well-being.
Former President Donald Trump is using legal tactics to delay the ongoing federal court case in Washington D.C. The case, which is set to go to trial in March 2024, has been the subject of numerous motions to dismiss filed by Trump's legal team. These motions, according to the discussion, are not based on the belief that Trump will win but rather an attempt to derail the trial until the DC Circuit Court of Appeals hears his appeal on the issue of absolute presidential immunity. Meanwhile, it's important to prioritize good sleep hygiene for optimal mental and physical health. Beam Dream, a healthy hot cocoa for sleep, is a popular solution for those seeking better rest. This all-natural blend of reishi, magnesium, L-theanine, melatonin, and nano CBD helps users fall asleep, stay asleep, and wake up refreshed. With flavors like cinnamon cocoa, sea salt caramel, and white chocolate peppermint, Beam Dream offers a delicious nighttime routine that can lead to more restful sleep and improved productivity. In summary, Trump's legal maneuvers aim to delay the DC trial, while Beam Dream's powerful ingredients can help you achieve better sleep and overall well-being.
Beam's Biggest Sale: Up to 50% Off Dream Powder: Former presidents do not have absolute immunity in criminal cases, as ruled by the DC Circuit Court of Appeals. Trump's legal team is currently requesting a stay in a related case, citing this ruling and another case.
Beam is currently offering significant discounts on their best-selling dream powder during their biggest sale of the year. Shoppers can enjoy up to 50% off by visiting shopbeam.com/legalaf, where the discount is automatically applied at checkout. Meanwhile, in legal news, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals has set a precedent that former presidents do not have absolute immunity in criminal cases, based on their ruling in the Blasting Game vs. Trump case. Despite this, Trump's legal team is currently requesting a stay of all proceedings in a related case, citing Blasting Game and another case, Coinbase vs. Bilaski, as precedent. However, it's important to note that Coinbase vs. Bilaski involved an arbitration provision and the determination of arbitrability, rather than presidential immunity.
President Trump's contradictory request for a stay and argument against immunity creates an absurd situation: The Supreme Court requires arbitrability to be resolved before merits-based discovery, but Trump's request for a stay in a case challenging his immunity contradicts this principle, potentially leading to a scathing order from the judge.
The Supreme Court has ruled that arbitrability, a threshold issue in a case, must be resolved before merits-based discovery can proceed. However, former President Trump, who is appealing the issue of absolute presidential immunity, is citing a case (Blasting Games) that states he has no immunity as the basis for a stay in the district court case. This creates an absurd situation, as Trump is asking for a stay while also arguing against the very immunity the case establishes. The DC Circuit has already ruled that official immunity issues must be resolved prior to litigation and discovery on the merits. Trump's decision to not participate in SEPA hearings, jury selection, trial defenses, and evidence, based on the authorities cited, will likely result in a scathing order from Special Counsel Jack Smith and a strong response from Judge Chutkan.
Challenging a Judge's Authority in a Legal Proceeding: Ben Mycelis, facing a direct challenge to Judge Chutkin's authority without a court order, cannot refuse to participate in a case but emphasizes the importance of staying informed through the Midas Touch Network.
Challenging a judge's authority in a legal proceeding without a court order is a complex issue. Ben Mycelis, in the given discussion, acknowledged that they cannot simply refuse to participate in a case without a court order, but also emphasized that they are currently facing such a situation. This presents a direct challenge to the authority of Judge Chutkin. The next steps in this case are uncertain, and Ben Mycelis promised to keep their audience updated. The Midas Touch Network, which has almost 2 million subscribers, encourages its followers to stay informed by following them on Instagram for the latest news. Overall, this situation highlights the importance of understanding the legal process and the potential consequences of challenging a judge's authority.