Live Breaking News & Updates on Justice brett

Stay informed with the latest breaking news from Justice brett on our comprehensive webpage. Get up-to-the-minute updates on local events, politics, business, entertainment, and more. Our dedicated team of journalists delivers timely and reliable news, ensuring you're always in the know. Discover firsthand accounts, expert analysis, and exclusive interviews, all in one convenient destination. Don't miss a beat — visit our webpage for real-time breaking news in Justice brett and stay connected to the pulse of your community

Opinion | Trump isn't immune, but his trial won't be soon, court hints

Opinion | Trump isn't immune, but his trial won't be soon, court hints
washingtonpost.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from washingtonpost.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.

Richardm-nixon , Donald-trump , Justice-neilm-gorsuch , Jack-smith , Justice-ketanji-brown-jackson , D-john-sauer , Justice-sonia-sotomayor , Justice-brettm-kavanaugh , Justice-elena-kagan , Oval-office , Supreme-court-on

In historic Trump hearing, Supreme Court suggests presidents may have some criminal immunity

In historic Trump hearing, Supreme Court suggests presidents may have some criminal immunity
wntxradio.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from wntxradio.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.

New-york , United-states , Florida , Washington , Iraq , Americans , Benjamin-franklin , Justice-brown-jackson , Katherine-faulders , Michaelr-dreeben , Mike-levine , Alexander-hamilton

Supreme Court's conservatives lean in favor of limited immunity for Trump as an ex-president

Supreme Court's conservatives lean in favor of limited immunity for Trump as an ex-president
spokesman.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from spokesman.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.

White-house , District-of-columbia , United-states , Washington , Justice-brettm-kavanaugh , Justice-neilm-gorsuch , Michael-dreeben , Justice-sonia-sotomayor , Justice-elena-kagan , Kenneth-starr , Donald-trump , Jack-smith

Supreme Court's conservatives lean in favor of limited immunity for Trump as an ex-president | State-Nation-World

Supreme Court's conservatives lean in favor of limited immunity for Trump as an ex-president | State-Nation-World
dailyrepublic.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from dailyrepublic.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.

District-of-columbia , United-states , White-house , Washington , Donald-trump , Justice-sonia-sotomayor , Michael-dreeben , John-sauer , Justice-brettm-kavanaugh , Justice-neilm-gorsuch , Jack-smith , Justice-ketanji-brown-jackson

Supreme Court seems poised to allow Trump Jan. 6 trial, but not immediately

The Supreme Court on Thursday appeared ready to reject Donald Trump’s sweeping claim that he is immune from prosecution on charges of trying to subvert the 2020 election, but in a way that is likely to significantly delay his stalled federal trial in the nation’s capital.

United-states , White-house , District-of-columbia , New-york , American , Justice-amy-coney-barrett , Rachel-weiner , Michael-dreeben , Perry-stein , Justice-sonia-sotomayor , Devlin-barrett , D-john-sauer

Key moments in the U.S. Supreme Court's latest abortion case that could change how women get care

By Amanda Seitz, Rebecca Boone and Mark Sherman | The Associated Press Dueling protests were taking place outside the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington.

Boise , Idaho , United-states , Washington , Justice-samuel-alito , Rebecca-boone , Justice-sonia , Rick-gentilo , Amanda-seitz , Ketanji-brown-jackson , Neil-gorsuch , Elizabeth-prelogar

Politics - HITS FM

Grant Faint/Getty Images(WASHINGTON) -- In historic Trump hearing, Supreme Court suggests presidents may have some criminal immunityAlexandra Hutzler,Meredith Deliso,Alexander Mallin, andMike LevineThe U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments Thursday on whether former President Donald Trump can be criminally prosecuted over his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss.The justices grappled with the monumental question of if -- and if so, to what extent -- former presidents enjoy immunity for conduct alleged to involve official acts during their time in office.Trump claims "absolute" protection for what he claims were official acts, though he denies all wrongdoing. The high court divided over this, but many of the conservative-leaning justices seemed open to some version of it while still excluding a president's "private" conduct.The high court's ruling will determine if Trump stands trial before the November election on four charges brought by special counsel Jack Smith, including conspiracy to defraud the United States. A decision is expected by June.Here's how the news developed:Apr 25, 12:50 PMSupreme Court's decision will directly impact when, if, Trump stands trialHow fast the justices move in making a determination will impact whether Trump stands trial before the November election -- if at all.Experts point to how the court handled Bush v. Gore, when the justices intervened to end a ballot recount and effectively hand George W. Bush the presidency in the 2000 election. In United States v. Nixon, the Watergate scandal tapes case, the Supreme Court heard arguments July 8, 1974, and issued its opinion rejecting his claim of executive privilege 16 days later.It’s not clear whether the court will move with such speed. The opinions are expected to be released before the court’s term ends in June.The justices could uphold the lower court decision rejecting immunity in its entirety, clearing the way for a trial this summer. Or they could kick the can down the road by sending the case back to lower courts for further proceedings -- which some conservative justices floated during arguments. Such an outcome could rule out a trial before the end of the year.Apr 25, 12:44 PMCourt adjournsOral arguments came to an end after two hours and 40 minutes.Trump attorney declined to give a rebuttal, and the case was submitted.Apr 25, 12:16 PM'We're writing a rule for the ages'Throughout arguments, multiple of the justices made clear they were looking past the immediate example of Trump to what their decision will mean for the future of the presidency."We're writing a rule for the ages," Justice Neil Gorsuch said."This case has huge implications for the presidency, for the future of the presidency and for the future of the country, in my view," said Justice Brett Kavanaugh."Whatever we decide is going to apply to all future presidents," said Justice Samuel Alito.Apr 25, 12:09 PMAlito suggests some sympathy toward Trump's positionJustice Samuel Alito has multiple times over the course of questioning sounded sympathetic toward Trump's positions.He also seemed to raise concerns about former presidents suffering the burden of having to go through a trial if they are criminally charged."That may involve great expense, and it may take up a lot of time, and during the trial the former president may be unable to engage in other activities that the former president would want to engage in, and then the outcome is dependent on the jury, the instructions to the jury and how the jury returns a verdict, and then it has to be taken up on appeal," Alito said at one point.In his final question to government attorney Michael Dreeben, Alito seemed to suggest that Trump's prosecution could serve to incentivize future presidents to try and unlawfully remain in office in order to avoid prosecution by their successors."Now, if an incumbent who loses a close, hotly contested election knows that a real possibility after leaving office is not that the president is going to be able to go off into a peaceful retirement -- but that the president may be criminally prosecuted by a bitter political opponent. Will that not lead us into a cycle that destabilizes the functioning of our country as a democracy?" Alito asked."I think it is exactly the opposite, Justice Alito," Dreeben replied, noting Trump and his allies filed dozens of lawful challenges to the results of the election and lost."There is an appropriate way to challenge things through the courts with evidence," Dreeben said. "If you lose, you accept the results, that has been the nation's experience, I think the court is well familiar with that."Apr 25, 11:58 AMDOJ on what executive functions have 'absolute protection'Asked by Justice Elena Kagan what "core" executive functions have "absolute protection," government attorney Michael Dreeben said they include pardon power, veto, foreign recognition and appointments."Congress cannot say you can't appoint a federal judge who hasn't received a certain diploma, hasn't achieved a certain age," he said.Commander in chief is also on the list, he said, though added that Congress has "substantial authority in the national security realm.""I think that there may be some aspects like directing troops on the field in which the president's power is completely unreviewable," he said.Apr 25, 11:41 AMJustices ask attorneys if presidents can pardon themselvesAs the justices wrestle with immunity, they are posing another question to lawyers: Can presidents pardon themselves?Justice Neil Gorsuch asked Trump attorney John Sauer about the possibility, saying presidents could be incentivized to do so if they fear their successors could prosecute them for actions they took while in office."I didn't think of that until your honor asked it," Sauer said. "That is certainly incentive that might be created."Michael Dreeben, arguing for the government, was later asked for his view on whether the president has such authority."I don't believe the Department of Justice has taken a position," Dreeben said. "The only authority that I'm aware of is a member of the Office of Legal Counsel wrote on a memorandum that there is no self-pardon authority. As far as I know, the department has not addressed it further, and the court had not addressed it either."Apr 25, 11:36 AMAlito asks how 'robust' protection against bad faith prosecution isJustice Samuel Alito addressed the "layers of protection" against bad faith prosecutions raised by the DOJ."I'm going to start with what the D.C. Circuit said. So, the first layer of protection is that attorneys general and other justice department attorneys can be trusted to act in a professional and ethical manner, right?" Alito said. "How robust is that protection?"Alito continued that the "vast majority" of attorneys general and justice department attorneys "take their professional ethical responsibilities seriously" but that there have been exceptions.In response, DOJ attorney Michael Dreeben agreed that there have been "rare exceptions" and said that "we're talking about layers of protection.""I do think this is the starting point, and if the court has concerns about the robustness of it, I would suggest looking at the charges in this case," he said."The allegations about the misuse of the Department of Justice to perpetuate election fraud show exactly how the Department of Justice functions in the way that it is supposed to," Dreeben said. "Petitioner is alleged to have tried to get the Department of Justice to send fraudulent letters to the states to get them to reverse electoral results."Apr 25, 11:29 AM'Making a mistake' as president doesn't result in charges: DOJMichael Dreeben, arguing for Smith's team, faced questions from Justice Samuel Alito on whether or not presidents can make a "mistake" given the many competing pressures they are under in their day to day duties.&qu

United-states , Washington , Florida , New-york , Iraq , Americans , Georgew-bush , Justice-amy-coney-barrett , Mike-levine , David-schultz , Justice-brett-kavanaugh , Michaelr-dreeben

Politics - Carroll Broadcasting Inc.

Grant Faint/Getty Images(WASHINGTON) -- In historic Trump hearing, Supreme Court suggests presidents may have some criminal immunityAlexandra Hutzler,Meredith Deliso,Alexander Mallin, andMike LevineThe U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments Thursday on whether former President Donald Trump can be criminally prosecuted over his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss.The justices grappled with the monumental question of if -- and if so, to what extent -- former presidents enjoy immunity for conduct alleged to involve official acts during their time in office.Trump claims "absolute" protection for what he claims were official acts, though he denies all wrongdoing. The high court divided over this, but many of the conservative-leaning justices seemed open to some version of it while still excluding a president's "private" conduct.The high court's ruling will determine if Trump stands trial before the November election on four charges brought by special counsel Jack Smith, including conspiracy to defraud the United States. A decision is expected by June.Here's how the news developed:Apr 25, 12:50 PMSupreme Court's decision will directly impact when, if, Trump stands trialHow fast the justices move in making a determination will impact whether Trump stands trial before the November election -- if at all.Experts point to how the court handled Bush v. Gore, when the justices intervened to end a ballot recount and effectively hand George W. Bush the presidency in the 2000 election. In United States v. Nixon, the Watergate scandal tapes case, the Supreme Court heard arguments July 8, 1974, and issued its opinion rejecting his claim of executive privilege 16 days later.It’s not clear whether the court will move with such speed. The opinions are expected to be released before the court’s term ends in June.The justices could uphold the lower court decision rejecting immunity in its entirety, clearing the way for a trial this summer. Or they could kick the can down the road by sending the case back to lower courts for further proceedings -- which some conservative justices floated during arguments. Such an outcome could rule out a trial before the end of the year.Apr 25, 12:44 PMCourt adjournsOral arguments came to an end after two hours and 40 minutes.Trump attorney declined to give a rebuttal, and the case was submitted.Apr 25, 12:16 PM'We're writing a rule for the ages'Throughout arguments, multiple of the justices made clear they were looking past the immediate example of Trump to what their decision will mean for the future of the presidency."We're writing a rule for the ages," Justice Neil Gorsuch said."This case has huge implications for the presidency, for the future of the presidency and for the future of the country, in my view," said Justice Brett Kavanaugh."Whatever we decide is going to apply to all future presidents," said Justice Samuel Alito.Apr 25, 12:09 PMAlito suggests some sympathy toward Trump's positionJustice Samuel Alito has multiple times over the course of questioning sounded sympathetic toward Trump's positions.He also seemed to raise concerns about former presidents suffering the burden of having to go through a trial if they are criminally charged."That may involve great expense, and it may take up a lot of time, and during the trial the former president may be unable to engage in other activities that the former president would want to engage in, and then the outcome is dependent on the jury, the instructions to the jury and how the jury returns a verdict, and then it has to be taken up on appeal," Alito said at one point.In his final question to government attorney Michael Dreeben, Alito seemed to suggest that Trump's prosecution could serve to incentivize future presidents to try and unlawfully remain in office in order to avoid prosecution by their successors."Now, if an incumbent who loses a close, hotly contested election knows that a real possibility after leaving office is not that the president is going to be able to go off into a peaceful retirement -- but that the president may be criminally prosecuted by a bitter political opponent. Will that not lead us into a cycle that destabilizes the functioning of our country as a democracy?" Alito asked."I think it is exactly the opposite, Justice Alito," Dreeben replied, noting Trump and his allies filed dozens of lawful challenges to the results of the election and lost."There is an appropriate way to challenge things through the courts with evidence," Dreeben said. "If you lose, you accept the results, that has been the nation's experience, I think the court is well familiar with that."Apr 25, 11:58 AMDOJ on what executive functions have 'absolute protection'Asked by Justice Elena Kagan what "core" executive functions have "absolute protection," government attorney Michael Dreeben said they include pardon power, veto, foreign recognition and appointments."Congress cannot say you can't appoint a federal judge who hasn't received a certain diploma, hasn't achieved a certain age," he said.Commander in chief is also on the list, he said, though added that Congress has "substantial authority in the national security realm.""I think that there may be some aspects like directing troops on the field in which the president's power is completely unreviewable," he said.Apr 25, 11:41 AMJustices ask attorneys if presidents can pardon themselvesAs the justices wrestle with immunity, they are posing another question to lawyers: Can presidents pardon themselves?Justice Neil Gorsuch asked Trump attorney John Sauer about the possibility, saying presidents could be incentivized to do so if they fear their successors could prosecute them for actions they took while in office."I didn't think of that until your honor asked it," Sauer said. "That is certainly incentive that might be created."Michael Dreeben, arguing for the government, was later asked for his view on whether the president has such authority."I don't believe the Department of Justice has taken a position," Dreeben said. "The only authority that I'm aware of is a member of the Office of Legal Counsel wrote on a memorandum that there is no self-pardon authority. As far as I know, the department has not addressed it further, and the court had not addressed it either."Apr 25, 11:36 AMAlito asks how 'robust' protection against bad faith prosecution isJustice Samuel Alito addressed the "layers of protection" against bad faith prosecutions raised by the DOJ."I'm going to start with what the D.C. Circuit said. So, the first layer of protection is that attorneys general and other justice department attorneys can be trusted to act in a professional and ethical manner, right?" Alito said. "How robust is that protection?"Alito continued that the "vast majority" of attorneys general and justice department attorneys "take their professional ethical responsibilities seriously" but that there have been exceptions.In response, DOJ attorney Michael Dreeben agreed that there have been "rare exceptions" and said that "we're talking about layers of protection.""I do think this is the starting point, and if the court has concerns about the robustness of it, I would suggest looking at the charges in this case," he said."The allegations about the misuse of the Department of Justice to perpetuate election fraud show exactly how the Department of Justice functions in the way that it is supposed to," Dreeben said. "Petitioner is alleged to have tried to get the Department of Justice to send fraudulent letters to the states to get them to reverse electoral results."Apr 25, 11:29 AM'Making a mistake' as president doesn't result in charges: DOJMichael Dreeben, arguing for Smith's team, faced questions from Justice Samuel Alito on whether or not presidents can make a "mistake" given the many competing pressures they are under in their day to day duties.&qu

Florida , United-states , New-york , Washington , Iraq , Americans , Ed-meese , Justice-sotomayor , Justice-ketanji-brown-jackson , Alexander-mallin , Jack-smith , Alexander-hamilton

Politics News - 1540 WADK Newport

Grant Faint/Getty Images(WASHINGTON) -- In historic Trump hearing, Supreme Court suggests presidents may have some criminal immunityAlexandra Hutzler,Meredith Deliso,Alexander Mallin, andMike LevineThe U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments Thursday on whether former President Donald Trump can be criminally prosecuted over his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss.The justices grappled with the monumental question of if -- and if so, to what extent -- former presidents enjoy immunity for conduct alleged to involve official acts during their time in office.Trump claims "absolute" protection for what he claims were official acts, though he denies all wrongdoing. The high court divided over this, but many of the conservative-leaning justices seemed open to some version of it while still excluding a president's "private" conduct.The high court's ruling will determine if Trump stands trial before the November election on four charges brought by special counsel Jack Smith, including conspiracy to defraud the United States. A decision is expected by June.Here's how the news developed:Apr 25, 12:50 PMSupreme Court's decision will directly impact when, if, Trump stands trialHow fast the justices move in making a determination will impact whether Trump stands trial before the November election -- if at all.Experts point to how the court handled Bush v. Gore, when the justices intervened to end a ballot recount and effectively hand George W. Bush the presidency in the 2000 election. In United States v. Nixon, the Watergate scandal tapes case, the Supreme Court heard arguments July 8, 1974, and issued its opinion rejecting his claim of executive privilege 16 days later.It’s not clear whether the court will move with such speed. The opinions are expected to be released before the court’s term ends in June.The justices could uphold the lower court decision rejecting immunity in its entirety, clearing the way for a trial this summer. Or they could kick the can down the road by sending the case back to lower courts for further proceedings -- which some conservative justices floated during arguments. Such an outcome could rule out a trial before the end of the year.Apr 25, 12:44 PMCourt adjournsOral arguments came to an end after two hours and 40 minutes.Trump attorney declined to give a rebuttal, and the case was submitted.Apr 25, 12:16 PM'We're writing a rule for the ages'Throughout arguments, multiple of the justices made clear they were looking past the immediate example of Trump to what their decision will mean for the future of the presidency."We're writing a rule for the ages," Justice Neil Gorsuch said."This case has huge implications for the presidency, for the future of the presidency and for the future of the country, in my view," said Justice Brett Kavanaugh."Whatever we decide is going to apply to all future presidents," said Justice Samuel Alito.Apr 25, 12:09 PMAlito suggests some sympathy toward Trump's positionJustice Samuel Alito has multiple times over the course of questioning sounded sympathetic toward Trump's positions.He also seemed to raise concerns about former presidents suffering the burden of having to go through a trial if they are criminally charged."That may involve great expense, and it may take up a lot of time, and during the trial the former president may be unable to engage in other activities that the former president would want to engage in, and then the outcome is dependent on the jury, the instructions to the jury and how the jury returns a verdict, and then it has to be taken up on appeal," Alito said at one point.In his final question to government attorney Michael Dreeben, Alito seemed to suggest that Trump's prosecution could serve to incentivize future presidents to try and unlawfully remain in office in order to avoid prosecution by their successors."Now, if an incumbent who loses a close, hotly contested election knows that a real possibility after leaving office is not that the president is going to be able to go off into a peaceful retirement -- but that the president may be criminally prosecuted by a bitter political opponent. Will that not lead us into a cycle that destabilizes the functioning of our country as a democracy?" Alito asked."I think it is exactly the opposite, Justice Alito," Dreeben replied, noting Trump and his allies filed dozens of lawful challenges to the results of the election and lost."There is an appropriate way to challenge things through the courts with evidence," Dreeben said. "If you lose, you accept the results, that has been the nation's experience, I think the court is well familiar with that."Apr 25, 11:58 AMDOJ on what executive functions have 'absolute protection'Asked by Justice Elena Kagan what "core" executive functions have "absolute protection," government attorney Michael Dreeben said they include pardon power, veto, foreign recognition and appointments."Congress cannot say you can't appoint a federal judge who hasn't received a certain diploma, hasn't achieved a certain age," he said.Commander in chief is also on the list, he said, though added that Congress has "substantial authority in the national security realm.""I think that there may be some aspects like directing troops on the field in which the president's power is completely unreviewable," he said.Apr 25, 11:41 AMJustices ask attorneys if presidents can pardon themselvesAs the justices wrestle with immunity, they are posing another question to lawyers: Can presidents pardon themselves?Justice Neil Gorsuch asked Trump attorney John Sauer about the possibility, saying presidents could be incentivized to do so if they fear their successors could prosecute them for actions they took while in office."I didn't think of that until your honor asked it," Sauer said. "That is certainly incentive that might be created."Michael Dreeben, arguing for the government, was later asked for his view on whether the president has such authority."I don't believe the Department of Justice has taken a position," Dreeben said. "The only authority that I'm aware of is a member of the Office of Legal Counsel wrote on a memorandum that there is no self-pardon authority. As far as I know, the department has not addressed it further, and the court had not addressed it either."Apr 25, 11:36 AMAlito asks how 'robust' protection against bad faith prosecution isJustice Samuel Alito addressed the "layers of protection" against bad faith prosecutions raised by the DOJ."I'm going to start with what the D.C. Circuit said. So, the first layer of protection is that attorneys general and other justice department attorneys can be trusted to act in a professional and ethical manner, right?" Alito said. "How robust is that protection?"Alito continued that the "vast majority" of attorneys general and justice department attorneys "take their professional ethical responsibilities seriously" but that there have been exceptions.In response, DOJ attorney Michael Dreeben agreed that there have been "rare exceptions" and said that "we're talking about layers of protection.""I do think this is the starting point, and if the court has concerns about the robustness of it, I would suggest looking at the charges in this case," he said."The allegations about the misuse of the Department of Justice to perpetuate election fraud show exactly how the Department of Justice functions in the way that it is supposed to," Dreeben said. "Petitioner is alleged to have tried to get the Department of Justice to send fraudulent letters to the states to get them to reverse electoral results."Apr 25, 11:29 AM'Making a mistake' as president doesn't result in charges: DOJMichael Dreeben, arguing for Smith's team, faced questions from Justice Samuel Alito on whether or not presidents can make a "mistake" given the many competing pressures they are under in their day to day duties.&qu

New-york , United-states , Washington , Iraq , Florida , Americans , Justice-sotomayor , Justice-roberts , Justice-ketanji-brown-jackson , Justice-amy-coney-barrett , Jack-smith , Justice-sonia-sotomayor

Supreme Court sounds wary of Idaho's ban on emergency abortions for women whose health is in danger

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court justices voiced doubt Wednesday about a strict Idaho law that would make it a crime for doctors to perform an abortion even for a woman

Boise , Idaho , United-states , California , Florida , Washington , Elizabethb-prelogar , Justice-sonia-sotomayor , Joshua-turner , Ketanji-brown-jackson , Justice-amy-coney-barrett , Justice-brettm-kavanaugh