@[email protected] to politics @lemmy.worldEnglish • 5 months agoSupreme Court action already upending January 6 rioter sentencings, being looked at by Trump defensewww.cnn.comexternal-linkmessage-square36fedilinkarrow-up1191arrow-down16
arrow-up1185arrow-down1external-linkSupreme Court action already upending January 6 rioter sentencings, being looked at by Trump defensewww.cnn.com@[email protected] to politics @lemmy.worldEnglish • 5 months agomessage-square36fedilink
minus-square@walter_wiggleslink15•5 months agoI don’t get it, how would Congressional proceedings not be federal proceedings?
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish8•5 months agoThe article does a poor job of communicating what the case is about. The questions presented: “Did the D.C. Circuit err in construing 18 U.S.C. § 1512© (“Witness, Victim, or Informant Tampering”). Which prohibits obstruction of congressional inquiries and investigations. to include acts unrelated to investigations and evidence?"[1] https://ballotpedia.org/Fischer_v._United_States
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish3•5 months agoI know, I know. We’re talking about Trump and his lawyers here, which means nothing makes sense by default. But wouldn’t the counting of the votes be a congressional inquiry? I mean it’s literally answering the question of “Who won the election?”. Can we go back to the days where a sane Supreme Court would have laughed this entire argument out of the room?
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilink4•5 months agoI would not call any supreme court “sane” but there was a period where there were some basic standards.
I don’t get it, how would Congressional proceedings not be federal proceedings?
The article does a poor job of communicating what the case is about.
https://ballotpedia.org/Fischer_v._United_States
I know, I know. We’re talking about Trump and his lawyers here, which means nothing makes sense by default.
But wouldn’t the counting of the votes be a congressional inquiry? I mean it’s literally answering the question of “Who won the election?”.
Can we go back to the days where a sane Supreme Court would have laughed this entire argument out of the room?
I would not call any supreme court “sane” but there was a period where there were some basic standards.
Semantics.