patrick.net

Woah! Here is WHY:



https://reason.com/volokh/2023/12/22/the-supreme-court-denies-cert-in-united-states-v-trump/

Why didn't our glorious media cover this?

https://reason.com/volokh/2023/12/21/jack-smith-lacks-standing-to-file-in-the-supreme-court-because-he-is-only-a-private-citizen/

Means Trump doesn't even have to show up to the court room, the whole travesty is void on its face. However, it is great publicity, so I suppose on that basis, the trial is inexpensive martyr promotion.

Means Trump should just let that politicized judge hang his own neck by having the whole trial declared as a mistrial afterwards.

UkraineIsFucked says

Woah! Here is WHY:



https://reason.com/volokh/2023/12/22/the-supreme-court-denies-cert-in-united-states-v-trump/

Why didn't our glorious media cover this?

Because that’s not why the SCOTUS wouldn’t advance the case.

That’s Mr Calebrisi’s opinion, and it wasn’t ruled on.

FuckTheMainstreamMedia says

Because that’s not why the SCOTUS wouldn’t advance the case.

That’s Mr Calebrisi’s opinion, and it wasn’t ruled on.

Yes it was. He filed a amicus brief petitioning SCOTUS to deny cert, and they did. :)

It's worded very carefully to imply that his brief was the reason that SCOTUS denied certification without actually saying that.

Never heard of this guy but to me it sounds like another grifter that is taking credit for something he had nothing to do with. Do the supremes issue any written statement when they decide not to hear a case? I If so I would need to read this statement and see if it referenced this dudes brief.

stfu says

Do the supremes issue any written statement when they decide not to hear a case?

Yes, they do. But this time it was only one sentence.

He co-wrote the amicus brief with Ed Meese and others.