There is a possibility they may see some opportunity for some immunity for some president ial decisions. If they decide it that way, it may have to go back down to the District Court which could cause further delay. I appreciate you not being sidetracked by somebody who apparently wants to scream louder than anybody else. Catherine, the lower courts have been unanimous that trump cannot claim immunity. Does that tell you something . I cant imagine theyre going to say a former president has absolute immunity for criminal acts. What will be a win for donald trump is if theyre saying were sending it back to judge chutkan to determine which, if any he would have immunity for and which he would not. Thats a win because that would delay the trial, which is already delayed. So what of course obviously jack smith and Special Counsel is hoping for, a majority of the court will just say, no, absolute immunity from Criminal Prosecution for a former president and clearly jack smith would say this
Case, six case, we cant keep track as it as it as an american, you know obviously could keep this conversation going from basically another hour and i am sorry to have to cut us all off. Thanks you guys for joining us. This is a great discussion on a very consequential day, thanks to all of you for being with us kasie hunt, cnn, your central starts right now cnn Breaking News A History Defining De For Donald Trump in not one, but two courtrooms im kate bolduan with john berman. Of course, sarah is out today never before has the country been forced to confront legal issues at the same time, like we are about to witness for one, how far the boundaries of immunity reach. Four the precedent that question in just hours will be center stage before the us Supreme Court. Were standing by for the arguments to begin at the high court over trumps fight, to try to get his federal Election Subversion case thrown out. That is now up to the justices to decide as Special Counsel, jack smith is pushing
now, i m not sure the president has even heard of the voting rights act. he certainly never brought any enforcement action under it. it seemed implausible on its face. the evidence at the trial really showed this was a bogus reason. the chief justice is saying look, mr. president, you can lie to the american people. i m not getting involved in that but don t lie to the federal judiciary. is there now the president is tweeting can we delay the census? yeah. so the two problems with that. number one his own lawyers and the u.s. solicitor general have come to the supreme court before and said we can t delay the census. they used that to try and bypass the court of appeals and race their case to the supreme court. now that that s failed, they re trying to say the president is trying to say we can delay the census. there s one problem with that. . it s called article one of the constitution. you don t have to go far. i know we have a president who doesn t like to read and not read the
you re standing before the supreme court and telling the supreme court the president believes x or did made this decision because of reason y, it s really hard to lose that case. you really almost have to try to lose it. it s kind of like failing a class at yale. you ve got to try. and here that s what happened. it s a remarkable opinion by the chief justice that basically said president trump s reasons were contrived. that s pretty powerful language. he meant the trump administration said we re adding this citizenship question to enforce the voting rights act. now, i m not sure the president has even heard of the voting rights act. he certainly never brought any enforcement action under it. it seemed implausible on its face. the evidence at the trial really showed this was a bogus reason. the chief justice is saying look, mr. president, you can lie to the american people. i m not getting involved in that but don t lie to the federal judiciary. is there now the president is tweet
and ones they were looking for to see campaign in future events and looking forward to seeing them side by side at future debates. they want to see how they interact and how they contend. democrats have now sized up the field. the field is now going to compete with itself for a long time and i think everybody on the stage did something to make their own case for why they should be in that competition. i don t feel like this is a kid gloves thing or they are all being nice to each other. that s not happening. they are starting to fight with each other, but all showing their stripes. i mean, i m exhausted and totally fried, but i think this is an exciting part of the primary. great job, rachel. you have earned your weekend. thank you. there she goes. the nap starts now. president trump lost a big case in the supreme court yesterday when the court denied the trump administration the right to include a question about citizenship in the census. they have to start printing next