Podcast Summary
Rooker-Feldman Doctrine: The Rooker-Feldman Doctrine prevents a federal court from interfering with state court rulings, especially those involving convictions, and Trump's team failed to follow proper procedures and provide sufficient justification for removal of his criminal trial from a state to federal court.
Donald Trump's team attempted to remove his criminal trial from a New York state court to a federal court just before sentencing, but their request was denied by Judge Hellerstein due to the Rooker-Feldman Doctrine. This doctrine prevents a federal judge from interfering with state court rulings, especially those involving convictions. The team failed to follow proper procedures and provide sufficient justification for the removal, leading to the denial of their request. This is a significant development in the ongoing legal proceedings against Trump.
Rooker-Feldman doctrine: Judge Helerstein dismissed one of Trump's grounds for removal based on dislike of state trial judge's rulings, citing Rooker-Feldman doctrine which prohibits federal courts from evaluating state court proceedings or decisions
Judge Helerstein, in his recent ruling, exercised his power as a federal judge under 28 USC. 14 55 B four, to make a summary decision on the papers without requiring an evidentiary hearing, briefing, or input from the Manhattan DA. He dismissed one of Donald Trump's grounds for removal, which was based on his dislike of certain rulings and biases of the state trial judge, as something that a federal court cannot evaluate under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. Therefore, the judge did not consider any issues related to the state trial court proceedings or the state judge's decisions.
Trump appeal process: Trump cannot use federal court to appeal Stormy Daniels hush money case, must go through state appellate court system in New York, and Judge Allerstein's ruling on immunity stands.
Donald Trump cannot use a federal judge to appeal his conviction in the Stormy Daniels hush money case. Instead, he must go through the state appellate court system in New York. The judge, Judge Allerstein, has already ruled that Trump's argument for immunity based on the Trump vs. US Supreme Court decision does not apply to this case as the private conduct at issue occurred outside the scope of his federal office. The recent Supreme Court decision does not change this analysis, but rather supports it. Therefore, the case will be remanded back to the state court.
Trump's sentencing halt attempt: Judge Hellerstein denied Trump's attempt to halt his sentencing, allowing him to only appeal in the appellate court and without an emergency stay. Meanwhile, Calm app offers tools to manage stress, anxiety, and improve sleep quality with exclusive offer for listeners.
Donald Trump's attempt to halt his sentencing through Judge Hellerstein has been denied. He can now only appeal the decision in the appellate court in New York, and he has not yet requested an emergency stay. Meanwhile, for those struggling with focus and productivity due to various life challenges, the Calm app offers a range of tools to help manage stress, anxiety, and improve sleep quality. With programs like meditations, sleep stories, calming music, and expert-led talks, Calm aims to provide personalized solutions for better mental and physical well-being. Listeners of this show can enjoy an exclusive offer of 40% off a Calm Premium subscription by visiting calm.com/legalaf.
Trump removal denied: Judge denied Trump's attempt to move his criminal case from state to federal court due to improper late filing and lack of sufficient grounds
Former President Donald Trump's attempt to remove his criminal case from a New York state court to federal court was denied by Judge Joel M. Cohen of the Southern District of New York. Trump's lawyers filed the notice of removal late and without proper grounds, according to the judge. They argued that Judge Mershan, who presided over the state court case, was biased against Trump due to her daughter's involvement in Kamala Harris' vice presidential campaign and her past financial contributions to Democratic politicians. However, the judge found that Trump did not demonstrate good cause for filing a second notice of removal and denied the request for removal. The case will remain in the New York state court.
Rooker-Feldman Doctrine, Trump's removal attempt: The federal court did not have jurisdiction to hear Trump's arguments regarding the propriety of his New York trial or to stop the state sentencing based on the Rooker-Feldman Doctrine. Trump's notice of removal was terminated.
The court did not have jurisdiction to hear Donald Trump's arguments regarding the propriety of his New York trial based on the Rooker-Feldman Doctrine. Trump had also requested the court to stop or stay the state sentencing, but this was deemed improper and outside the court's jurisdiction. The court emphasized that issues of bias, fairness, and errors in the state trial were not for the federal court to evaluate, but rather for the state appellate courts. The court did consider Trump's second argument on immunity but reiterated its previous ruling that the hush money payments were private and unofficial acts. Therefore, Trump's notice of removal was terminated, and he was unable to proceed further in federal court.
Trump's legal appeal: Trump's legal team's attempt to delay his sentencing was blocked, increasing uncertainty for his upcoming debate performance and potential jail time
Donald Trump's legal team's attempt to delay his sentencing in the New York criminal case by appealing a judge's decision on immunity has been blocked. This means Trump will have to go back to the drawing board and file an emergency application with the appellate division on the night of the 16th if he wants to prevent his sentencing on the 18th. The likelihood of getting an emergency injunction is uncertain, and if he doesn't, Judge Mermchan may impose a sentence with potential jail time. This development could make Trump even more unhinged during the upcoming debate, and legal enthusiasts can follow the proceedings closely on Legal AF.
Midas Touch and Legal AF shows: Michael Fock hosts two shows, Midas Touch with Karen Friedman and potentially Ben, and Legal AF, on the same network discussing law and politics and providing hot takes on legal issues respectively.
Michael Fock hosts two shows, Midas Touch and Legal AF, on the same network. Midas Touch, co-hosted with Karen Friedman on Wednesdays at 8 p.m. and possibly with Ben on Saturdays, covers the intersection of law and politics. Legal AF, where Fock goes solo, provides hot takes on legal issues at a rapid pace. Tune in to the Midas Touch network for insightful discussions on law and politics every Wednesday and Saturday at 8 p.m. (Wednesdays for Midas Touch and potentially Saturdays for both Midas Touch and Legal AF). Stay informed and engaged with the latest legal and political news with Michael Fock.