On January 9, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit heard oral arguments as to whether former President Trump is entitled to presidential immunity for acts in his official capacity concerning the Capitol riot on January 6, 2021. Prior to the argument, the three-judge panel had agreed to Special Counsel Jack Smith’s request for expedited briefing. After the panel granted this motion, the Supreme Court denied Smith’s petition for certiorari before judgment, thereby declining to bypass the D.C. Circuit. Four weeks after the argument, the D.C. Circuit ruled in Smith’s favor. Many leftists, who had predicted a quick defeat for Trump, were displeased. Liberal scholar Norman Ornstein, for instance, questioned the integrity of U.S. Circuit Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson. As the senior judge on the panel, Judge Henderson had the authority to assign the majority opinion to herself. She wound up joining a per curiam opinion, where no judge took authorship, that came out the way Ornstein desired. Ornstein, however, allowed partisanship to trump patience. Prior to the publication of the opinion, he insinuated, without a scintilla of evidence, that Judge Henderson was holding up the opinion to help Trump.
Battle of Rights: Defendants Vanquish Voters
Battle of Rights: Defendants Vanquish Voters
Battle of Rights: Defendants Vanquish Voters
On January 9, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit heard oral arguments as to whether former President Trump is entitled to presidential immunity for acts in his official capacity concerning the Capitol riot on January 6, 2021. Prior to the argument, the three-judge panel had agreed to Special Counsel Jack Smith’s request for expedited briefing. After the panel granted this motion, the Supreme Court denied Smith’s petition for certiorari before judgment, thereby declining to bypass the D.C. Circuit. Four weeks after the argument, the D.C. Circuit ruled in Smith’s favor. Many leftists, who had predicted a quick defeat for Trump, were displeased. Liberal scholar Norman Ornstein, for instance, questioned the integrity of U.S. Circuit Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson. As the senior judge on the panel, Judge Henderson had the authority to assign the majority opinion to herself. She wound up joining a per curiam opinion, where no judge took authorship, that came out the way Ornstein desired. Ornstein, however, allowed partisanship to trump patience. Prior to the publication of the opinion, he insinuated, without a scintilla of evidence, that Judge Henderson was holding up the opinion to help Trump.