not get to appeal or have this argument until after the trial, after it has been a conviction and sentencing. which is feeling odd to people. yes, you have to go through the whole thing and then you can attack it except in very narrow circumstances where a defendant is allowed to take what we call the interlocutory appeal meaning the appeal before your trial. now, both, interestingly, donald trump s team and jack smith s team agree, yes, he is allowed to take the interlocutory appeal, and this is the kind of the case that you can do that. so we have to pause, but we are hearing from democratic senator bob menendez on the latest indictment against him. and since the beginning of this process. and for that, at least a year prior to the bringing of this indictment which therefore begs question, why did the government not proceed with all of these accusations from the beginning?
emphasized by justice scalia where the interlocutory appeal not before trial, similar question in i d also point out that the judgment has challenged the jurisdiction. has to be in our own jurisdiction. mid land asphalt the suggestion? i believe you are correct. an excellent point. turning to the merits if i may, your honor, to authorize the prosecution of a president for his official abilities would open a pandora s box from which this nation may never recover. could george w. bush be prosecuted for obstruction of an official proceeding for
so talk us through what that looks like. sure. so, to understand this, as my colleague mary mccord there s something called an interlocutory appeal. sorry to get into the weeds, but the normal role in a criminal case is that nothing goes up to an appellate court until the case is over. another waits, until there s a verdict. you have a trial, and the jury decides one way or another what should happen. that is the normal time there is an appeal. there are very few exceptions to that. and this, apparently, falls into an exception, and i say apparently because it s really not clear that this should ve been allowed for what s called this interim, or interlocutory appeal. so it seems pretty clear that the d.c. circuit is going to talk about that on tuesday. they actually issued an order to the party saying that
delay, in pursuit of his goal of delaying all of this. and you re out with his great piece on msnbc.com this morning, about the ways in which the appeals court could basically and stick this whole process. so talk us through what that looks like. process sure. so to understand this, as my colleague merrick mccord says, there is something called a interlocutory appeal. sorry to get into the weeds. but the normal role in a criminal case is that nothing goes up to an appellate court until the case is over. until there s a verdict, you have a trial, and the jury decides one way or the other what should happen. that s the normal time that there s an appeal. there are very few exceptions to that. and this apparently falls into an exception, and i say apparently because it is really not clear that this should have been allowed for what s called this interim or interlocutory appeal. and so it seems pretty clear that the d.c. circuit is going
donald trump appealed to the united states supreme court to overturn colorado s ruling to kick him off that states primary ballot. the ex president starts off his appeal by arguing that it is a fundamental principle of our representative democracy embodied in the constitution that people should choose whom they pleased to govern them. although that seems to suggest voters should decide, without restriction, ignoring all the restrictions on presidential candidates in the constitution, including day at least be 35 years old, born in the u.s., and, according to section three of the 14th amendment, not engage an insurrection against the very country they took an oath to defend. but trump argues that he is not subject to the section three of the 14th amendment because the president is not an officer of the united states. he also claims that section three applies only to those who took an or to support the constitution of the united states, such as u.s. senators and representatives, that the