US: Supreme Court’s double-jeopardy case holds Mueller probe implications; Kavanaugh vote key - PressFrom - US

USSupreme Court’s double-jeopardy case holds Mueller probe implications; Kavanaugh vote key

23:05  06 december  2018
23:05  06 december  2018 Source:

Corsi says Mueller probe is led by partisans

Corsi says Mueller probe is led by partisans The author and conspiracy theorist said special counsel Robert Mueller's probe was politically motivated.

Judge Kavanaugh , if confirmed to the Supreme Court , could be a deciding vote on a case that has the potential to dramatically increase the power Since the 1850 s , the Supreme Court has allowed for one explicit exception to the Constitution’ s double jeopardy protections: cases of dual sovereignty

Why the Big Double Jeopardy Supreme Court Case Isn’t a Threat to the Mueller Probe . The upcoming Supreme Court case Gamble v. United States has fueled speculation that Republicans are pushing for a favorable outcome in order to free Trump to issue pardons of his associates without fear

Supreme Court’s double-jeopardy case holds Mueller probe implications; Kavanaugh vote key© Provided by Fox News Network LLC

A Supreme Court case concerning double-jeopardy rules is receiving outsized attention due to its potential implications for Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia probe.

At issue in the case heard Thursday is whether and when being tried in state and federal courts for the same crimes is permissible. Under a current constitutional exception, it has been allowed for years.

A court reversal here could be far-reaching – and represent a sea change in how state, federal and tribal criminal cases are handled.

The justices raised tough questions Thursday about being tried twice for the same crime in different jurisdictions – "a double whammy," as Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg put it – yet a majority seemed inclined to preserve what the Trump administration calls 170 years of precedent allowing an exception to the double jeopardy provision.

Supreme Court delays arguments for Bush national day of mourning

Supreme Court delays arguments for Bush national day of mourning The Supreme Court is delaying its Wednesday arguments in order to observe the national day of mourning planned for former President George H.W. Bush. The high court was scheduled to hear oral arguments for Gamble v. United States, a case about the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment, on Wednesday. The justices will now hear the arguments the following day, according to the Supreme Court announcement. The late former president's funeral will take place on Wednesday at 11 a.m. at Washington National Cathedral. He is set to lie in state in the Capitol Rotunda from Monday through Wednesday morning.

President Donald Trump nominated Judge Brett Kavanaugh to become an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States on July 9, 2018, filling the vacancy left by the retirement of Anthony Kennedy.

A Supreme Court Case Could Liberate Trump to Pardon His Associates. A key Republican senator has quietly weighed in on an upcoming Supreme Court case that could have important Within the context of the Mueller probe , legal observers have seen the dual-sovereignty doctrine as a (Both states have a double - jeopardy law that bars secondary state prosecutions for committing “the same

Justice Elena Kagan said respect for precedent (known by the Latin phrase stare decisis) is a bedrock principle.

"Part of what stare decisis is, is a kind of doctrine of humility," she said, "where we say we are really uncomfortable throwing over 170-year-old rules that 30 justices have approved just because we think we can kind of do it better."

But Justice Neil Gorsuch warned against prosecutorial zeal:

"With the proliferation of federal crimes, I think over 4,000 statutes now and several hundred thousand regulations, the opportunity for the government to seek a successive prosecution if it's unhappy with even the most routine state prosecution is a problem."


Supreme Court double jeopardy case could impact presidential pardon power

Supreme Court double jeopardy case could impact presidential pardon power The Supreme Court on Thursday will consider an exception to the Fifth Amendment's ban on prosecuting an individual twice for the same offense in a case that could also possibly impact President Donald Trump's pardon power as it applies to the Robert Mueller probe. require(["medianetNativeAdOnArticle"], function (medianetNativeAdOnArticle) { medianetNativeAdOnArticle.getMedianetNativeAds(true); }); Decades ago, the Supreme Court developed an exception to the Fifth Amendment's double jeopardy clause and it is now being asked to rethink precedent.

Kavanaugh reveals views on Mueller probe . Neil Gorsuch confirmed to supreme court . How are Supreme Court justices chosen? Washington (CNN) President Donald Trump has nominated Brett Kavanaugh to join the US Supreme Court , setting the stage for a dramatic confirmation battle over a

Here are five interesting cases in which Kavanaugh could be the deciding vote . In another case with implications for lengths of prison sentences, the Supreme Court has agreed to hear The Supreme Court ’ s decision is expected to have significant implications for how theft crimes are defined and will

Yet the status quo being defended by the Trump DOJ holds potential implications for the Trump-tied targets of the Russia probe.

The intriguing relevance to Mueller’s investigation would be if one of the defendants charged or convicted in the broad investigation -- such as Trump’s former campaign chairman Paul Manafort -- were to be pardoned by the president for various federal offenses. Would a state then be allowed to pursue its own separate charges, including tax evasion or corporate fraud?

The Supreme Court’s ruling could have an impact on the answer.

Trump himself has not ruled out such a pardon, and Manafort is scheduled to be sentenced separately in two federal courts next February and March.

That pardon scenario was not raised in Thursday's 80-minute Supreme Court oral argument, but lawyers from both sides raised a host of worst-case scenarios to boost their positions. The argument was delayed a day in respect for the national day of mourning and funeral for the late President George H.W. Bush.

Has Kavanaugh Betrayed Conservatives?

Has Kavanaugh Betrayed Conservatives? For the past few decades, the Supreme Court has taken us miles off course and the Roberts Court would be committed to regaining our path a few steps a year. Too much damage has been done to the constitutional order of separate branches of government exercising limited government powers to protect individual rights. It takes four justices voting yes for the Supreme Court to review a case. Justice Thomas, joined by Justices Alito and Gorsuch, dissented from the denial in this case. As always, Justice Thomas’s writing provides a crystal-clear and compelling legal justification for accepting review.

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a double jeopardy case that could have implications for those How the Court — which by then may include a new Justice Kavanaugh — resolves Double Jeopardy and Dual Sovereignty. The protection against double jeopardy is one of the English

Brett Kavanaugh has become the fifth conservative judge in America’ s highest court , after being narrowly confirmed by senators In a chamber where Republicans hold the narrowest of majorities, all senators voted in accordance with party lines, with the exception of Democrat Joe Manchin of West

The Constitution’s double-jeopardy clause in the Fifth Amendment prohibits anyone being "subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb."

But the high court has also recognized the "separate sovereignty" between state and federal prosecutions – meaning similar charges for the same conduct but in different jurisdictions.

In the current appeal, Terance Gamble was arrested, charged and convicted for gun possession by a felon in both Alabama and federal courts, with his sentences served concurrently. He is set to be released from prison in 2020, three years longer than he would have if convicted only in Alabama.

The Trump Justice Department – backed by three-dozen states, including New York and Texas – wants to preserve the long tradition of discretion for successive prosecution in state and federal courts.

In the arguments, several justices worried about the fallout from tossing this sovereign exception. Justice Stephen Breyer worried it would make it harder to prosecute sexual and domestic violence on Indian reservations, among other cases.

Conservatives shouldn't lament Justice Brett Kavanaugh's rulings

Conservatives shouldn't lament Justice Brett Kavanaugh's rulings Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined his liberal peers on the Supreme Court in declining to review a case determining whether states have the right to block abortion providers from their Medicaid programs. Many conservatives are furious, but they shouldn't be. "The life of a conservative: Go to war for someone against the Leftist hordes who tried to destroy his life, only to have him screw you over the first chance he gets," wrote commentator and radio host Jesse Kelly on Twitter. This is dead wrong. Kavanaugh voted in his mold of a precedent set years ago. In his 2011 dissent in Seven-Sky v.

Democrats are continuing their calls to delay the confirmation hearings of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court . They cite a lack of information and Michael Cohen linking the president to a federal crime as reasons to delay the hearings. (Aug. 23) AP.

The Senate confirmed Brett Kavanaugh , 53, to the Supreme Court Saturday, where he could easily serve for more than two decades and change how the nation' s laws are interpreted. Kavanaugh reveals views on Mueller probe . Neil Gorsuch confirmed to supreme court .

"Look at the door we're opening up," he said. "There are briefs that say remember the civil rights world where people were, with victims of a different race, simply killing them or worse, and the state" would never convict, and the federal government could be prevented from getting involved.

Justices Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh said overturning the exception would also apply to foreign prosecutions, making it potentially impossible to hold accountable terrorists who kill Americans overseas.

"If prosecution is part of the national security efforts of the United States, federal prosecution, then your position would substantially hamper those national security efforts," Kavanaugh told Gamble's lawyer Louis Chaiten.

But the newest justice also raised a counter-argument. "From the perspective of negative liberty, freedom from government oppression or government regulation, your rule strikes some as an infringement of basic concepts of individual liberty," he told Justice Department lawyer Eric Feigin. "You didn't get me the first time; you're going to take another crack at it."

Kavanaugh added that overturning precedent requires showing an earlier decision was not just wrong, but “grievously wrong, egregiously wrong."

And Ginsburg questioned when it would be in the national government's interest to use its broad discretion to file subsequent charges.

Justice Department asks Supreme Court to let transgender military ban take effect

Justice Department asks Supreme Court to let transgender military ban take effect The Justice Department has asked the Supreme Court to allow the ban on transgender people in the military to go into effect pending appeal. The administration already has a pending request for the Supreme Court to bypass the lower courts and take up a case concerning the ban, which has been blocked by lower courts. Now the Department of Justice is taking it a step further. In a brief filed Thursday night Solicitor General Noel Francisco requests that if the Supreme Court declines to take up the case this term, the justices allow the Trump policy to go into effect while the case plays out in the lower courts.

The Supreme Court is considering Gamble’ s case on Thursday, and the outcome could have a spillover effect on the investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election. At issue is whether to overturn a court -created exception to the Constitution’ s double - jeopardy bar that allows state and

case , the Supreme Court finally applied federal double jeopardy protection to state law. The Supreme Court was noticeably less generous in the case of Alex Blueford, whose jury had unanimously acquitted him on capital murder charges before hanging on the issue of whether to

"Federalism is usually invoked because it's a protection of the liberty of the individual," she said, "but here the party being strengthened is not the individual, it is the state's freedom and the federal government's freedom to prosecute the same offense, in this case the felon in possession."

Justices Ginsburg and Clarence Thomas – normally on opposite ideological sides – have both urged their colleagues to revisit this issue. Now with Kavanaugh aboard, he could be the wildcard that decides the matter.

Dual prosecutions in state-federal courts have become more common in the past two decades, particularly involving acts of racial animus or violence.

Feigin told the high court the federal prosecutions of those charged in mass shootings at a Pittsburgh synagogue in October and at a Charleston, S.C., church attended by African-Americans in 2015 were properly labeled hate crimes and violations of civil rights that had different legal elements from the state murder charges the defendants would face.

And the man accused of deliberately plowing his car into marchers protecting a white supremacy rally in Charlottesville last year -- killing one woman -- also faces federal hate crime charges. His state trial will go to the jury this week.

But the attorney for Gamble cited cases going back to Europe in the 17th century that he said supported the long-established idea of no exceptions to the double-jeopardy rule.

The case is Gamble v. U.S. (17-646). A ruling is expected by the spring next year.

Mueller probe has cost more than $25M so far.
Special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election has cost the Department of Justice more than $25 million, according to new and previous expenditure reports. A statement of expenses released Friday shows Mueller spent $4.5 million in the six months from April 1 to Sept. 30, the bulk of the costs coming from "personnel compensation and benefits." The report said special c ounsel office employees alone were paid $1 million over this period. In addition to the $4.

—   Share news in the SOC. Networks

Topical videos:

usr: 1
This is interesting!