← Back to context

Comment by ceejayoz

4 days ago

> Unfortunately, the result would be that Trump…

...would have been sentenced for his 34 felony convictions and probably never get reelected?

14 comments

ceejayoz

Reply
parineum  4 days ago

None of these three things are related.

SCOTUS doesn't rule on criminal cases, sentencing for state level crimes is done at the state level and he could have still run for president in jail.

The fact that the conviction only made his polling go up should tell you what the result of jailing him would have been.

  • ceejayoz  4 days ago

    > SCOTUS doesn't rule on criminal cases…

    SCOTUS ruled that the President has immunity from criminal prosecution.

    (And they very regularly rule on other, more mundane criminal cases. Where on earth did you get the idea they don't? https://oklahomavoice.com/2025/02/25/u-s-supreme-court-tosse... as a super random example.)

    > sentencing for state level crimes is done at the state level

    SCOTUS ruled that said immunity applies to state crimes.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_v._United_States#Opinion...

    This was... rather large news.

    https://www.politico.com/news/2025/01/10/trump-unconditional...

    > “This court has determined that the only lawful sentence that permits entry of judgment of conviction without encroachment on the highest office of the land is a sentence of unconditional discharge,” Merchan said at the sentencing.

    > The fact that the conviction only made his polling go up should tell you what the result of jailing him would have been.

    We have precisely zero information on what a campaign by a jailed candidate who can't travel, campaign, or schmooze donors would result in.

    • parineum  4 days ago

      > SCOTUS ruled that the President has immunity from criminal prosecution. > SCOTUS ruled that said immunity applies to state crimes.

      And yet he was criminally prosecuted.

      > And they very regularly rule on other, more mundane criminal cases.

      Sorry, they don't convict in criminal cases.

      > “This court has determined that the only lawful sentence that permits entry of judgment of conviction without encroachment on the highest office of the land is a sentence of unconditional discharge,” Merchan said at the sentencing.

      You're conflating things again. He was not punished for his crimes. That doesn't mean he was not convicted. You can't be immune and convicted. If he was immune, the case would have been thrown out. He's still a felon and so, clearly, not immune.

      The immunity granted by SCOTUS was far more limited in scope than news outlets would have you believe.

      > We have precisely zero information on what a campaign by a jailed candidate who can't travel, campaign, or schmooze donors would result in.

      This time it will be different, surely!

      1 reply →

zzrrt  4 days ago

Are you saying a Biden-packed SC would have directly resulted in Trump being jailed? How? And my understanding was he was sentenced for the felonies, to unconditional discharge, because he was days away from beginning his second term. So how would that have gone differently just because the SC was packed?

Edit: Oh, maybe you’re thinking of things like the Colorado ballot eligibility case. Then if he hadn’t been electable, he would have been sentenced to serve time. Maybe, but are you arguing the Constitutional merits of Trump losing that case? Or are you okay with partisan hacks in the SC as long as they are Dems instead?

  • ceejayoz  4 days ago

    > Edit: Oh, maybe you’re thinking of things like the Colorado ballot eligibility case.

    No, I'm thinking of the get-out-of-jail card they gave him in Trump v. US that immediately impacted NY v. Trump.

    > Then if he hadn’t been electable, he would have been sentenced to serve time.

    No, I think an electable person should still be able to be locked up for crimes.

    > Or are you okay with partisan hacks in the SC as long as they are Dems instead?

    I think the only chance of saving SCOTUS from partisan hackery is to stop surrendering.

  • ceejayoz  4 days ago

    > Are you saying a Biden-packed SC would have directly resulted in Trump being jailed?

    I don't think a Biden-packed SC would've found the President to be immune to criminal charges, no.

    > And my understanding was he was sentenced for the felonies, to unconditional discharge, because he was days away from beginning his second term.

    He was sentenced to nothing, directly because of the SCOTUS ruling. Per the judge: "the only lawful sentence that permits entry of judgment of conviction without encroachment on the highest office of the land".

    Pre-SCOTUS ruling, no such "encroachment" existed.

  • myko  4 days ago

    If trump had lost he would have ended up in prison for his many obvious crimes (most especially Jan 6th and the classified documents fiasco)

zeroonetwothree  4 days ago

NY v Trump was a state criminal case. The Supreme Court would not have been involved.