- Joined
- Sep 1, 2019
cruz is a scotus lawyer having argued cases before scotus. whats he up to? his podcast hasnt been updated in a while. his latest said trump needs better lawyers.There are three arenas here; the public one, the media one and the judicial one. I'm going to point out a couple of things about the judicial one. Constitutional law, in particular as to how it relates to elections, is a rather specialized area of law. Giuliani and Powell, as far as I know, are neither experienced or experts in this field. We do know one firm that does have experience in this area backed off. I don't know anything about Rudy and Sidney's law firms, their history or practice.
People like Giuliani and Powell don't try cases all by themselves; they have, and have always had, an army of associates who research and write briefs. The attorney in charge is suppose to be able to pick out the arguments with the best merit, precedence and chance of success.
To argue a case before SCOTUS a lawyer has to be admitted to the SCOTUS bar. Again, I don't know if either Rudy or Sidney have the necessary credentials (and I certainly hope Rudy will be sitting this one out because he doesn't look up to the job, hair dye notwithstanding).
Then there is submitting an appeal to, getting a case accepted by and then arguing a case before SCOTUS. Entire books have been written about the subject. Each Justice has their own areas of specialization, philosophy and style. A huge part of bringing a case before SCOTUS is knowing how to craft an appeal that will interest the majority of the Justices so they'll accept it. Part of this is psychology, ie, having knowledge of the Justices themselves, their history prior and subsequent to their appointment, speeches they have given, articles they have written, private practice/lower court rulings, previous employment, etc. For example, Ginsburg was an open book before her appointment as she had written a lot for law reviews and argued several cases.
There is also the murky and rarely talked about issue of political and peer pressure. Justices are human beings, with families, interests and of course ego. They are susceptible to the same influence and emotions everyone else is. Anyone who believes the Justices, all of them, are not being subjected to intense pressure if even a single one of Trump's cases comes before the Court is fooling themselves. They face being remembered as the Court that either gave a hated (by the MSM/political class) President a second term or made a meat puppet with Alzheimers President.
Either way they and their families will be in for a lot of attention, most of it not good. We already know Roberts lacks a backbone, Sotomayor and Kagan will side with libs and each other and Breyer usually, but not always, leans liberal. Thomas, Alito and the Trump appointees are constructionists. Both Democrats and Republicans are going to apply pressure if they haven't already.
What do we know about the cases, what law firm(s) filed and who argued them before the courts? Not as exciting as dick pictures but a better indication of how this will end. This is an area that's not talked much except when there's a ruling against Trump. Also, this has to wrapped fast so there's no hunting for knowledgeable and/or experienced lawyers.
Fast, as in the deadlines for certification are nearly here; tomorrow is the certification deadline for PA and MI.
if lawyers dont represent trump becauss they're a fraid of being firebombed what legal remedy would trump have?