Posted on 04/15/2024 6:24:50 PM PDT by Macho MAGA Man
In Addition to being prohibited from attending my son Barron’s High School Graduation, I have just learned that the highly biased Judge in the Soros “appointed” D.A. Alvin Bragg’s Witch Hunt Case, will not allow me to attend the historic PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY argument in front of The United States Supreme Court, on Thursday, April 25th (next week!).
(Excerpt) Read more at truthsocial.com ...
I stand corrected. From NY Penal Law:
§ 260.20 Jury trial; defendant’s presence at trial.
A defendant must be personally present during the trial of an
indictment; provided, however, that a defendant who conducts himself in
so disorderly and disruptive a manner that his trial cannot be carried
on with him in the courtroom may be removed from the courtroom if, after
he has been warned by the court that he will be removed if he continues
such conduct, he continues to engage in such conduct.
I’ve never heard of anyone attending the SCOTUS hearing about their case. Does that ever even happen?!
I mean, I wouldn’t know why someone couldn’t attend their hearing, but isn’t it typically just the counsel involved in the appeal?
That’s what I was just posting about too!
Do people whose case depends on a SCOTUS ruling ever show up to the hearing? I thought it was mostly just the counsel involved in the appeal.
I know SCOTUS is kind of weird and you can’t even take pictures of them doing any kind of business.
And not allowing him to attend his son’s graduation, I suppose your fine with that too rat.
EVERYTHING is totally out of hand!
All of reality is lost on those who are afflicted with terminal TDS.
So much for the God given right to liberty garuenteed by The Declaration Of Independence.
Agreed.
I’m sick of people who repeat false rumors or ignore facts because they hate.
-PJ
I have. It was during one of the Obama eligibility cases that was appealed to the Scotus. The guy who brought the lawsuit appeared with his attorney.
“Obviously yes it is tampering. The lawyers who do speak in front of SCOTUS work for their client. The client needs to be there.”
————-
You are not correct. The Supreme Court is not a finder of fact and, as such, there is no particular reason why a person involved in a case that the Court is deciding needs to be there. The Supreme Court determines whether the law, or the Constitution (the ultimate law in our country), is or is not being followed in any given case.They are not going to ask any questions of the defendant or proponent in a case. In a Supreme Court case, the attorneys for each side give an opening statement, they are asked questions by the justices, and then they give a closing statement. That is all that happens. Most often, cases are decided based upon the briefs submitted weeks or months earlier, not based upon the oral arguments. The person charged with a crime in a case in which the Supreme Court is deciding what the law is, does not need to be there. It Is often the case that the people who are involved with a case in front of the Supreme Court do not attend. It is most certainly NOT a requirement.
I never said that the Supreme Court is a finder of fact nor did I give that as a reason why the litigant has the right to be there. And the rest of your post also doesn't address my point.
US Supreme Court is a higher priority. Trump should obviously go to that.
Trump can still attend SCOTUS, since it is his case and SCOTUS has superior jurisdiction over the New York Superior Court.All Trump needs is an order to attend SCOTUS, easy to get.
He needs to just go anyway. 🙄
I had the same question. When is the graduation?
According to one article, the graduation is May 17th, which is a Friday.
Going to need a plan B
They're too busy reauthorizing FISA and sending billions to Ukraine.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.