Mistrial for Manhattan Trump case??

[RedFan]

The Supreme Court has made decisions jumping ver the state court ......Try Gore vs. Bush in Florida /////

Supreme Court finally jumped in and said "No more"

In Bush v. Gore the highest court of the State of Florida had already spoken when SCOTUS took up the case! Aren't you paying attention? I will say it for the last time: No state court decision is reviewable by SCOTUS until all state court appeals have been exhausted.

 

[bluedragon]

In Bush v. Gore the highest court of the State of Florida had already spoken when SCOTUS took up the case! Aren't you paying attention? I will say it for the last time: No state court decision is reviewable by SCOTUS until all state court appeals have been exhausted.

SCOTUS will leapfrog when they get tired of left wing state that makes up rules of their own ......Like New York. They have the power to do so. No state has absolute sovereignty

 

[RedFan]

SCOTUS will leapfrog when they get tired of left wing state that makes up rules of their own ......Like New York. They have the power to do so. No state has absolute sovereignty

States do have "absolute sovereignty" in the interpretation of state statutory law. SCOTUS has recognized this. Johnson v. Fankell, 520 U.S. 911, 916, 117 S.Ct. 1800, 138 L.Ed.2d 108 (1997) (“Neither this court nor any other federal tribunal has any authority to place a construction on a state statute different from the one rendered by the highest court of the state.”). So if the New York Court of Appeals interprets the statute on which Trump was convicted the same way the trial court did, that's the final word on it.

 

[bluedragon]

States do have "absolute sovereignty" in the interpretation of state statutory law. SCOTUS has recognized this. Johnson v. Fankell, 520 U.S. 911, 916, 117 S.Ct. 1800, 138 L.Ed.2d 108 (1997) (“Neither this court nor any other federal tribunal has any authority to place a construction on a state statute different from the one rendered by the highest court of the state.”). So if the New York Court of Appeals interprets the statute on which Trump was convicted the same way the trial court did, that's the final word on it.

Wrong
The reason SCOTUS exists.
To make the Uncontutional actions of a Unconstitutional State Court correct

New York is a prime example. Political idiots taking the Constitutional rights of an individual.

You can apologize later.

 

[RedFan]

Wrong
The reason SCOTUS exists.
To make the Uncontutional actions of a Unconstitutional State Court correct

New York is a prime example. Political idiots taking the Constitutional rights of an individual.

You can apologize later.

No, I'll apologize now. For taking you seriously. I can't explain the law of appellate review to you, so I'll stop trying.

 

[bluedragon]

You are wrong about the state having the final ultimate word.

You’ll see how wrong you are when Trump takes it to the Supreme Court. Should it go that far.

 

[Reggie Belafonte]

Yes Drain the Swamp !

Expose the evil's of the total Corruption that is working, so as to be dominating over everyone like a mogrel dog !

Trump has them, they are running loose and he is sitting back, for they have s--- in their own nest ! only their own nest has gotten that big that the mess will be so huge. it's like a Cancer that has to be removed or else the Nation will Die !

The world wants to become like South Africa has been run, by total Crimals who dominate over everyone like a mongrel dog !

 

[RedFan]

You are wrong about the state having the final ultimate word.

You’ll see how wrong you are when Trump takes it to the Supreme Court. Should it go that far.

What I was wrong about was apologizing for the wrong thing. It's not that you can't understand appellate jurisdiction. It's that you don't read carefully.

I said that state high courts have the final ultimate word on matters of state law. Only their pronouncements on federal law (if any) are reviewable by SCOTUS.

I said that SCOTUS review was unavailable until all state court review had run its course. There can be no "leapfrog" over that jurisdictional prerequisite.

Anyway, I doubt SCOTUS will ever get its arms around Trump's conviction, because I expect the New York appellate court to reverse it based on incorrect jury instructions given by the trial judge.

 

[bluedragon]

What I was wrong about was apologizing for the wrong thing. It's not that you can't understand appellate jurisdiction. It's that you don't read carefully.

I said that state high courts have the final ultimate word on matters of state law. Only their pronouncements on federal law (if any) are reviewable by SCOTUS.

I said that SCOTUS review was unavailable until all state court review had run its course. There can be no "leapfrog" over that jurisdictional prerequisite.

Anyway, I doubt SCOTUS will ever get its arms around Trump's conviction, because I expect the New York appellate court to reverse it based on incorrect jury instructions given by the trial judge.

In that I agree .....

 

[mailmandan]

Ashli Babbitt Lawsuit Against Feds Moved from San Diego to Washington DC - Assigned to Far Left Anti-Trump Judge Appointed by Biden | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft

Nearly three years after the protests on January 6, 2021, Judicial Watch filed a $30 million wrongful death suit against the federal government for the Capitol Police shooting of Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

That lawsuit will go nowhere under that far left anti-Trump judge.