1. Home
  2. /
  3. Politics
  4. /
  5. Slideshow
  6. /
  7. Rep. Raskin Criticizes Supreme...

Rep. Raskin Criticizes Supreme Court Decision Allowing Trump’s Presidential Immunity Claim: ‘We Don’t Have a King Here’

Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland has strongly criticized the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to entertain Donald Trump’s argument asserting immunity from prosecution for actions taken during his presidency.

Raskin, speaking on MSNBC’s Inside with Jen Psaki, emphasized the urgency for the Court to expedite a decision, highlighting concerns over potential delays to Trump’s federal trial.

Raskin’s Opposition to Supreme Court Decision

Credits: DepositPhotos

Raskin denounced the Supreme Court’s decision to hear Trump’s immunity claim, arguing that the D.C. Circuit Court’s ruling, which rejected Trump’s immunity assertion, should have been allowed to stand.

Trump’s Claim Contradict the US Constitution

Credits: DepositPhotos

He described the D.C. Circuit Court’s decision as comprehensive and compelling, asserting that Trump’s claims of presidential immunity contradict the principles of the Constitution.

Constitutional Principles at Stake

Credits: DepositPhotos

Asserting the foundational principles of the Constitution, Raskin emphasized that “we don’t have a king here” and that as per the Constitution, the President’s role is to ensure that the “laws are faithfully executed” rather than “violated” for serving their interests.

Impact on Trial Proceedings

Credit: DepositPhotos

The Supreme Court’s decision to take up Trump’s immunity claim is expected to further delay his federal trial, potentially pushing proceedings back by several months.

Expedited Schedule

Credits: DepositPhotos

The Court has set an expedited schedule for hearing arguments on the immunity issue, with oral arguments scheduled for the week of April 22, leading to a freeze in trial court proceedings until then.

Criticism of Supreme Court’s Timing

Credits: DepositPhotos

Raskin and others have criticized the Supreme Court’s timing, suggesting that the issue could have been addressed much earlier to avoid prolonged delays.

Hope for Swift Decision

Credits: Depositphotos

Referencing historical precedents, Raskin expressed hope for a swift decision, likening the urgency to past instances where the Court moved quickly on significant matters.

Allegations of Political Motivations

Credits: DepositPhotos – NEW YORK, USA – Sep 21, 2017: Meeting of the President of the United States Donald Trump with the President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko in New York — Photo by palinchak

Raskin raised concerns about potential political motivations guiding the Supreme Court justices, particularly given the appointments of three justices by Trump.

Judges Deliberately Delaying Suit

Credit: DepositPhotos

He questioned whether certain justices may be inclined to delay trials, suggesting that the Court’s composition may influence its decisions on high-profile cases.

Implications of Court Composition

Credit: DepositPhotos

Drawing attention to the composition of the Supreme Court, Raskin highlighted the influence of justices that are “choices of minority presidents,” including two each from Trump and Bush.

Court Overturning Established Precedents

Credit: DepositPhotos

He argued that the Court, shaped by appointments from presidents who did not win the popular vote, may be inclined to challenge established precedents, such as Roe v. Wade.

Read More From The Stock Dork

Credits: DepositPhotos

Passionate project manager with a knack for crafting engaging and content with a black belt in creativity, powered by coffee.