Don't let Donald Trump pick a Supreme Court justice unless and until Mueller clears him
Don't let Donald Trump pick a Supreme Court justice unless and until Mueller clears him
Richard Greene, Opinion contributor Published 3:15 a.m. ET July 16, 2018 | Updated 9:52 a.m. ET July 16, 2018
Trump and his associates are under investigation. Why should someone who may have 'broken into' the White House make decisions that last generations?
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/07/16/donald-trump-no-supreme-court-justice-until-mueller-clears-him-column/776030002/
If you break into a house illegally, are you given the legal ability to enjoy the house, to sell the furniture or to sell the house? Of course not. Why, then, should someone who may have "broken into" the White House illegally be able to enjoy all the perks of the house and office?
If you or your political campaign accept $1,000 in donations from a Russian citizen or company, you have violated federal election law and can go to jail. This not an idle question. Special Counsel Robert Mueller is investigating whether Russian oligarchs illegally funneled contributions to President Donald Trump's campaign, directly or indirectly.
Why should a candidate or campaign that may have accepted and-or benefited from Russian money and help escape penalties? And even more importantly, why should such a candidate, as president, be given the ultimate, sacred opportunity to define the U.S. Supreme Court in his image for generations?
And it gets worse. If Trump is indicted by Mueller or a grand jury, he will almost certainly challenge the indictment on the grounds that a sitting president cannot be indicted. In what country, other than a complete dictatorship, would a president be able to appoint two of the five Supreme Court justices needed to vindicate him — and thereby possibly determine his own fate? Justice Neil Gorsuch and nominee Brett Kavanaugh, if he's confirmed, will almost certainly be the deciding votes on whether to quash an indictment against the man who gave them their lifelong positions.
<<snip>>
Why aren’t we at least asking this question? Maybe it even makes sense to argue that everything such a president has done — including the previous appointment of Justice Gorsuch — should be undone and declared void ab initio (void from the beginning), because he had and has no legal jurisdiction to do such things.
= new reply since forum marked as read
