Trump Guilty Verdict: “There are some serious constitutional problems with this case”
Yale Law Professor Jed Rubenfeld lays out the basics and problems of the verdict: “What exactly was Trump just found guilty of?”
Twitter (X) law is like the broken clock that is right twice a day.
I saw multiple people tweeting that a video released by Yale Law Professor Jed Rubenfeld was a must watch on the basics and potential constitutional problems of the Trump ‘hush money’ trial guilty verdict.
Jed Rubenfeld is literally married to Tiger Mom. I guarantee you there are no errors in his arguments.
— Moog Rogue (@moogrogue) June 4, 2024
They were right.
I know nothing about Rubenfeld, but he doesn’t come across as partisan on either side. And a lot of his arguments are consistent with the arguments we made in our Telegraph Op-Ed (though he makes them better, but in fairness, we were under a 650 word limit).
I don’t have a transcript of his video, but here’s a handy guide from his YouTube posting:
The Trump hush-money criminal trial verdict is in—and it’s guilty. What does it mean? And what’s next? In the debut episode of my new show—Straight Down the Middle—I will walk you through it all. As a professor of law, one-time federal prosecutor, and constitutional law scholar, I have over three decades of experience with complex constitutional issues and I want to share everything I know with you and how it applies to the issues we see in the real world. In this episode, I walk through The Basics of the Trump verdict, The Constitutional Issues facing the conviction, and the Next Steps.
Chapters: 0:00
Intro 0:48
The Basics 7:45
The Constitutional Issues 16:28
Next Steps 22:37 Outro
WATCH. THE. WHOLE. THING.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
All I know is that if Biden brings up the “convicted felon” phrase during the debates, Trump should respond with, “Well, the whole country saw you poop your pants.”
Didn’t the Pope have a similar experience with Biden.?
If the Republicans ever want to win the White House, win super majorities in both houses of Congress and win big down ballot, again, they need to stop their pattern of reporting vote totals from their rural and suburban districts until after the big cities have reported. Make the large cities/counties go first.
“Keep your powder dry lads, and wait until you see the whites of their eyes.”
I’ve been saying this for years. Indicate that you’re done counting and then indicate that you will turn in your results when the rest have been turned in.
Brilliant, yes, because many of the last-ditch suspicious vote counts that turned close elections have occurred in the cities. Kennedy got elected in 1960 thanks to a last minute “find” in Chicago, and one in Texas, though I don’t know exactly where; but that’s where his VP Johnson was from.
No. They must require counties to report on election day.
That too
No, the response should be “And you’re the guy who showered with his preteen daughter.”
At least that states a fact that doesn’t depend on Bidens incontinence; something upon which some comment-makers are focused.
“Poop your pants.” Really? Are they 3rd graders?
And, as crude as Trump can be, I doubt he’d stoop to toilet humor.
I’d say being a pedophile is much worse that shitting yourself.
Unconvicted felon, Joe Biden
Or ask him if he’s taking showers with his daughter or other teen girls.
its nottt poop in his pants
its his next thought
He should refer to Biden as “the candidate who isn’t mentally competent to stand trial for his crimes.” (Getting in both the fact he’s been investigated for crimes and only escaped prosecution by way of his senility.)
Go for specifics: “You are the candidate who stole classified documents as a Senator and were determined to be incompetent to stand trial, and yet you want to run the country into the ground for another four years. Sit down and shut up.”
Great job Professor Jacobson. Outstanding commentary and advice from Yale Jed R. in understanding the Trump trial. All should view and subsequently realize what trash has been delivered to the American people and forced to digest. Unfortunately, many many very bright people numbering in the millions have gone to their propagandized news feed and drank the kool-aid.
I don’t know which is the less desirable job: being a lawyer tasked with autopsying Marchan’s courtroom record, or being a Cologuard technician.
I think a Cologuard tech would be way better than being joie’s diaper changer.
each list the other as a requirement
Let’s add up the legal tab for Donald J Trump in New York …
Over $100,000,000 stolen from Trump due to the insane, made-up accusations of some lunatic skank over an alleged assault that she can’t even pinpoint to a year, widely past the statute of limitations, anyway, but allowed back in – only to go after Trump – by an illegal law passed by the New York Legislature and signed by the governor that gave the skank a window of a year to file her suit. The lunatic skank sued for “defamation” … as if she could be defamed. She IS a lunatic skank.
Nearly $500,000,000 taken from Trump by Laetitia James and Arthur ENgoron over a laughable case where they claimed that the billion dollar piece of real estate – Mar-A-Lago – was only worth about $18 million. There are studio apartments in Manhattan that go for millions … but 19 acres in Palm Beach with dual waterfronts … an empty 2 acre parcel was for sale there for $300,000,000 during the show trial.
And, now, Trump is in jeopardy of being sentenced to over 140 years – one hundred and forty years!!!! – over a bookkeeping entry that the prosecution lied about, that affected nobody and nothing, and that was perfectly legal all ways around.
And that was just the judicial attacks on Trump from New York … Over half a billion dollars in BS awards and holding him in jeopardy of over 100 years in prison. And not even a smidgeon of of any of the accusations against him are true or reasonable or legitimate. Not a bit.
Everyone who was involved in all of the cases needs to suffer the punishments they helped place Trump subject to – and that includes the despicable juries. They are all guilty of the worst crimes that any civilized society can have to deal with. There is a reason why “shall not bear false witness” made the Top Ten Commandments. The perversion of the judicial system is the worst offense that can be made against a society, outside of flat-out war – which the dems are waging via the judicial system and by all other means, too.
Yes, but the Left doesn’t care.
All facts, logic, common sense, and decency are out the window as far as the Left is concerned.
The Right has been backing the War On Drugs since the beginning and especially since Nixon. Dr. Lonny Shavelson in his book “Heroin” said that 70% of female heroin addicts had been sexually abused in childhood. American Medical Schools teach addiction is a symptom of PTSD. – The ‘Drugs cause addiction’ excuse for Prohibition doesn’t work anymore. Wait ’til it gets out that the Right has a policy of abusing abused children.
One good thing has come of it. Nixon’s War On Blacks (Lawfare) is driving Blacks to Trump.
Also note that the above would tend to indicate that Democrats are the party of abused children – loose attitudes towards drugs and sexual deviancy are further indications.
Marx was an abused child.
PTSD caused by child abuse is a mental illness.
Nixon did not have any war on blacks, in fact he went out of his way to help them.
Nixon brought us no-knock raids, resulting in the deaths of innocent people, shot pets, and terrorized wives and children… until “oops we got the wrong house, qualified immunity, too bad so sad, hah hah hah”.
nixon being blamed btw is the easy way out for lefty b/c he was pro american and you know how they hate that pov
in the 1960s a CA cae in the supreme court gave power to the no knock so that drugs couldnt be destroyed etc
THE FACT THAT DEMS hate poc and wanted to see them sell and use drugs to destroy their lives is what is NOT TALKED ABOUT
b/c ,,once again,, the name nixon invokes a calculated agenda/pov by the communists to discredit america
now I will agree that when the cops f up
its bad realll bad
and is why putting the taxpayers on the hook is morally wrong
and “immunity” in and of itself is wrong
just b/c one is abused doesnt mean they are given carte blanch to abuse others
b/c THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT DEI/CRT are all ablout promoting
and you know 1000% you would not want that abused abuser living in YOUR HOME
so you can stop the fake empathy show
This is not true. Not only was there nothing illegal about the law, but the way you phrased that was intended to imply that it was passed with the specific intent of allowing this plaintiff to bring this suit against this defendant. That is a complete fabrication. If you didn’t intend it that way, please say so; but if you did then you should retract it.
The law was completely legal; I think it was bad policy, and the legislature should never have passed it, but there’s nothing in the state or US constitution that forbids it. If there had been, it would have been challenged and overturned long before anyone had even heard of this Carroll creature and her delusions.
Exactly. Even though the people who got the law passed have openly stated that this was the reason for the law they are liars and don’t know what they were doing.
It was a perfectly legal ex post facto law.
The “ex post facto” proscription applies only to criminal law. Wasn’t the law in question here a civil law? (See Madison’s Notes of the Debate in the Federal Convention.)
Given the admitted motivation for the law, it may violate the proscription on bills of attainder.
What admitted motivation? The motivation had nothing to do with Trump and the legislators had no idea Trump would end up being sued under it.
No, you are the liar, because they never said that or anything like it.
The ex post facto clause applies only to criminal law. So the Supreme Court has held since soon after the constitution was ratified.
LOL.
WTFF would lead anyone to write something stupid like that?
Of course the law was passed for the expressed intent of letting the lunatic skank drag Trump into court.
If that bothers you then you can go cry in the corner.
That is a lie. There was never any such intent.
Millhouse:
Is there a reason that no one mentions the fraud element of the statute? The way I read the statute, it’s not even a misdemeanor if there is no intent to defraud. And there cannot be fraud (even in NY) if the incorrect ledger entries are not submitted to someone for some purpose
Good point. I had wondered about that. 175.05 says explicitly “with intent to defraud”. I don’t recall the prosecution ever even bothering to allege such intent.
Milhouse, it was pretty widely reported that this law was specifically passed to allow Carroll to sue Trump. The timeline seems to fit. Could you give your reasoning for this not being the case?
Widely reported where? Only in Trumpalo propaganda, as far as I can tell.
My reasoning is very simple. Apparently unlike you, I remember when this was passed. I remember when it was proposed several times and failed. I remember the intense campaign for it. I was against it, and I remember being disappointed when it passed, and predicting that it would have dire consequences. In all the press coverage, all the press releases, all the politicians’ statements for or against it, nobody ever mentioned the name “Trump”. And if Trump were the target it was an uncommonly blunt instrument to use, since hundreds of suits were brought under it long before anyone heard of this Carroll creature.
New York’s Adult Survivor’s Act went into effect Thursday, allowing survivors of sexual assault or abuse who were 18 years or older at the time to file a civil lawsuit against their abuser past the state’s statute of limitations.
you are again disingenuous
the law was extended to ACCOMMODATE A MEANS TO AN END DIRECTLY AGAINST TRUMP
Thats the Equivalent of “making another law” and directing a law specifically against someone
ARTICLE 1 SECTION 9
CLAUSE 3
The clause thus prohibits all legislative acts, “no matter what their form, that apply either to named individuals or to easily ascertainable members of a group in such a way as to inflict punishment on them without a judicial trial. . . .”
so NY DIRECTLY MADE A LAW BY EXTENDING THE STATUTE AND SO THAT THEY COULD THEN
AFTER THE FACT ( of creating that new law) GO AFTER TRUMP
You are lying. Trump was the farthest person from the legislators’ minds when they passed this.
Thank you professor for posting that very informative video.
Biggest problem is the Constitution isn’t applicable in new york. They decided the criminal life was much better so they rigged everything to nth degree and just tore up the Constitution.
We should just deport all the democrats and liberals along with the illegal aliens.
Send Dems to South Africa.
The selective prosecution case against Bragg is easy to prove – Bragg’s own words and the obvious way he and his co-conspirators struggled to find ANY way they could bring criminal charges against Trump.
As to comparable circumstances … I would wager that you can look into any politician’s spending and actions in a political race in New York and find all manner of spending they did that could be considered – by the “Trump” standard – “campaign expenditures”. ANYTHING, really – haircuts, clothes, sweetheart press coverage, charitable donations (that the candidate gave only to make him look like a “caring” person for the campaign), … The “Trump” standard of a campaign expenditure is anything that might have helped the campaign, which includes pretty much everything a candidate does.
These charges were a sick farce and this trial was a sick farce and it is humiliating and stupid for anyone to even waste the time making a legal analysis of this obvious Soviet show trial, which offends the sensibilities of everyone with an IQ over 85 and a smidgeon of a conscience.
The only analysis that should be done about this travesty should be that in determining the prison sentences and other punishments for all those involved. And these punishments have to be merciless. These are the most dangerous sorts of people that a society can be cursed with.
With respect to your 2nd paragraph, keep in mind that since the early 2000s, Congress has spent at least $17M in sexual harassment lawsuits filed against members of Congress. Not ONE of those settlements have ever been disclosed to the public. And, I suspect not one of those Congressman have claimed that settlement either as an ‘in-kind’ contribution or campaign expense. What are the chances at least one of those settlements was paid to a House or Senate member from New York? Probably a decent chance, right?
You mean WE paid 17 Million dollars to cover up Congress critters sexual harassment lawsuits and we, the public can’t know who we are protecting because that is classified??
At least. The number is certainly much higher than that because prior to about 14-years ago, they never kept a running tally of what they were paying out in these kinds of settlements.
A question in my mind: how many of those settlements were paid out in behalf of ugly congresscritters as opposed to handsome or attractive ones?
I think I can guess.
That is not true, and anyone who claims it is not telling the truth. Congress’s Office of Compliance reported in 2017 that since 1997 it had paid $17M in all settlements of employee lawsuits, not just those alleging sexual harassment.
Such settlements are of course not public information; they’re always confidential, and that binds both parties. Name one employer that does publish its settlements of lawsuits.
And such settlements are certainly not campaign contributions! Who exactly would the contributor be, and how could that contributor possibly be bribing the congressman, which is the entire basis for requiring the publication of campaign contributions. And no, none of the settlements were paid to any member of Congress! They were paid to congressional employees!
The bottom line is that there is nothing remarkable in the fact that Congress, like any other large employer, is occasionally sued by its employees, making all kinds of allegations, whether true or false, and that they usually find it in their interest to settle suits rather than fight them, again whether they allegations are true or false.
” Name one employer that does publish its settlements of lawsuits.”
Name one employer other than the US government that is using TAXPAYER money for these settlements. And, name one other employer where the harassers are required by law to disclose these settlements as either campaign expenses or in-kind campaign donations, according to Alvin Bragg.
Also, according to CNN, 80% of recent harassment claims were not reported to OOC; what they fail to add is that is likely because they were settled privately, BEFORE even reaching mediation. Show me one other politician in America who has been charged, much less convicted of this nonsense FEC violations over these ‘hush-money’ payments.
What an extraordinarily stupid take. Of course when any defendant settles lawsuits against it, it uses its own money. So when the US government is the defendant, it uses its own money for the settlement. Who else’s money could or should it use?!
There are no such employers. The US government does not engage in campaign expenses, because it doesn’t run campaigns.
As for contributions, from whom would the contribution be?! From the government?! If the government did contribute to a campaign, how could it possibly be corrupting? Who exactly would be buying the congressman’s favor, and for what possible purpose? If such a payment were to induce a congressman to be more inclined to the public interest, that would be a good thing!
The fact remains, and you completely failed to address it, that your statement that “since the early 2000s, Congress has spent at least $17M in sexual harassment lawsuits filed against members of Congress” is an utter f***ing lie that you made up. It did not exist in your source; you invented it.
Who settled them privately? The Congress? Or the individual congressman for whom the complainer worked? If the latter, then the payment wouldn’t be coming from the taxpayer, would it?
What violation? Who alleged there would be any violation about an employer settling an employee lawsuit, which is a completely routine and normal thing?
Again, your claim of $17M in sexual harassment claims over 20 years is a complete fabrication.
I’d say it is a huge problem if the taxpayer is covering the bill for ONE F*CKING DOLLAR of sexual abuse payoffs for those crooks.
The US government is liable for lawsuit against it. Like any defendant, it decides on pragmatic grounds whether to fight a lawsuit or settle. Either way, the cost of fighting or of settling (including the cost of damages in cases that it fights and loses) comes out of its own money, which it obtains by laying taxes.
And again, that figure of $17M for sexual harassment lawsuits, over 20 years, is a lie. There is no “slush fund”, and no special provision for sexual harassment over other claims. There is a fund set aside for settling employee lawsuits when its lawyers judge that wise, just as any large employer has.
Over the course of 20 years I wonder how many employees sued the Trump Organization for this, that, or the other, and how many of those suits were settled rather than going to trial. One thing I think we can be certain of is that of those lawsuits it settled over those 20 years, it’s almost guaranteed that at least one was for sexual harassment, simply because that is one of the things for which employers are commonly sued, whether justly or unjustly.
This is an excellent video.
Sen. Tom Cotton: If New York Was A Foreign Country, America Would Sanction Them For Targeting Political Opponents, Rigging Elections
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2024/06/02/sen_tom_cotton_if_new_york_was_a_foreign_country_america_would_sanction_it_for_targeting_political_opponents_rigging_elections.html
If Trump loses because of this, and then is vindicated on appeal, then the election interference worked. That’s what this is about. Sad when Americans use the examples of the world’s worst tyrants as a means to govern.
I like Tom Cotton but his argument there was awful. Shrillary was not guilty of doing anything like Trump was (falsely) accused of. Shrillary was guilty of running an illegal server in her bathroom, moving classified and top secret documents onto it, illegally, lying about it all and erasing evidence when she was subpoenaed. And those are just the crimes for which she was being “investigated”, let alone all the other criminal and illegal stuff the Clinton clan has done over the years. And the problem with the Steele Dossier was not that she put it down as “legal expenses” but that she committed treason with it, colluding with foreigners to steal an American election.
I like Tom Cotton but I scream whenever I hear people try to argue my side that incompetently. Further, he was making a point that there is something particularly wrong with charging and trying former officials … Not in the least. There is only something wrong in railroading former officials with obviously false and ridiculous charges and then running show trials. There is nothing wrong with indicting and prosecuting people who commit actual crimes. In fact, there is something wrong with NOT indicting and trying people who commit actual crimes.
” And the problem with the Steele Dossier was not that she put it down as “legal expenses”
No, the problem with the Steele Dossier is that both the DNC and the Clinton campaign illegally accounted for it in their FEC filings. That’s not my opinion. That’s the opinion of FEC, which then fined Clinton and the DNC $100K.
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/03/30/dnc-clinton-campaign-fine-dossier-spending-disclosure-00021910
This is prima facie evidence of EXACTLY the crime that Bragg alleged Trump committed. The Clinton Campaign was based in New York. She committed ‘bookkeeping’ errors in order to conceal another crime (the FEC violation) to influence an election…and wasn’t prosecuted for it by New York.
Speaking of unConstitutional – there is no Drug Prohibition Amendment. No one seems to care.
Nixon’s War On Blacks (Lawfare) is driving Blacks to Trump. It has been going on for 50+ years. – Systemic Racism is real. I did a post about it. https://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/2024/05/blacks-are-victims-of-lawfare.html
American Medical Schools teach addiction is a symptom of PTSD.
The persecution of ‘addicts’ (people in pain) has been a long time Republican hobby. Dr. Lonny Shavelson in his book “Heroin” said that 70% of female heroin addicts had been sexually abused in childhood.
“Systemic Racism is real.”, by blacks on all other races. Look at how they have treated Jews. Grifters
As I see this, competent blacks can and do succeed on merit. But they are a small percentage of blacks, and the rest who are not competent are a huge drain on society.
Are you characterizing the war on drugs as war on blacks? Do you think that illicit drugs harm blacks? Or is your issue war on crime, because black on black crime is a huge issue?
For your next post, could you be just a bit more off-topic?
“Speaking of unConstitutional – there is no Drug Prohibition Amendment. No one seems to care.”
Bingo. There was a time that Congress understood that its authority under the commerce clause did not extend to the outright criminalization of anything that moved in interstate commerce, and that it needed a constitutional amendment that granted such authority.
Two important points:
1. Even with the amendment’s authority, Congress understood the commerce clause (under which Prohibition’s laws operated) didn’t permit intrusion into individual rights. Only commercial manufacture (for general consumption) and distribution of alcohol was affected. The making of alcohol for personal use, and the manufacture of alcohol for use in religious ceremonies, was unaffected by the statutes passed in pursuance of the amendment.
2. The States have no native authority to ban anything moving in interstate commerce, because Congress has exclusive legislative jurisdiction over such objects. The 18th Amendment granted the States concurrent jurisdiction over alcohol for the purpose of banning its manufacture and distribution (authority they retained under the 21st Amendment). (That is to say, a constitutional amendment was necessary for the States to acquire jurisdiction over articles of manufacture moving in interstate commerce, and to grant the specific authority to ban those articles.)
Contemplate the ramifications of these facts. They’re quite astounding.
Constitutional amendments were replaced by unrepresentative treaty powers. Read up on the Bricker Amendment. Bricker cared. The swamp clobbered him.
They’re not Constitutional issues so much as just plain rule of law issues.
Trump is guilty of being Trump. That’s why they hate him.
That’s it in a nutshell.
I think there’s a LOT of truth in what he says during his stump speeches: ‘They hate you. I’m just in the way.’
Trump’s lawyers failed miserably to impeach Stormy’s testimony. Stormy’s male, porno co-stars should have been called to the stand to testify that she faked her orgasms.
Why would that matter? Porn is entertainment. The players are actors acting!
Oh sure, I suppose next you’ll be telling me wrestling is staged.
whats this “constitution” you are talking about???
its tribalism in America that rules the day
even some scotus justices cant tell you what a women or a man is
Strategy is everything.
I observe:
Prosecution of the former President Trump and leader of the opposition of the Democrats currently in control on charges made up of thin air, in a biased court with a biased Prosecution, Biased and spoon-fed Jury who were practically ordered to return a conviction.
” We’ll hang him in the morning, right after the speedy trial ”
And the Jury instructions were outstanding.
And Merchan.. he is a soldier.
You cannot say he is an idiot.
This is a Judge. An educated man.
He took this job to convict Trump knowing well he one opportunity, and playing by established rules would not be enough to assure conviction.
It is patently obvious this will not stand.
It doesn’t even matter.
Everyone walks away a winner. Except us.
The Democrats did get Trump. For the moment.
The right wing Republicans get to grand-stand and yell from the roof-tops and chase down every camera they can find.
Merchan and his partner, the D.A. will be handsomely rewarded by the Democrat Party. Even if they never work again, they won’t need to.
For now, the case is going to be kicked about through the system.
Trump will be bombarded by a paper-storm, they’ll do everything they can think of to him. He knows this.
Trump raked in a couple bucks. He’ll need it.
It’s all a ruse. We are being played.
But everyone got what they wanted.
In the end Trump will be elected, this case will languish a while and eventually fade into the night.
Their are two parties. They just take turns exploiting us.
And…
Threein is your strategy.
Merchan’s behavior was so outrageous I have to wonder if he was instructed, “Get guilty verdicts, but be so egregiously wrong in the conduct of the trial that it will be overturned.”
Their primary goal would have been to secure the conviction above all else. Whatever happened after an appeal would almost certainly happen LONG after the election was contested and Merchan (and his conspirators, if they exist, would have understood this). His behavior was the way it was because if a principled jurist was was overseeing that trial, there’s a reasonably good chance Trump is acquitted or at minimum, there’s a hung jury.
No, his whole ponit of trying to gag Trump from exposing his daughter and his deep ties to Democrats was to try and pretend that he was ‘unbiased’ and that everything was legitimate.
When that failed he clearly said to himself, ‘well the cat’s out of the bag, so I better just go whole hog and ensure he gets convicted’ and went mask off full bore on it.
the jury knew oj was guilty but let him go
the jury knew trump was innocent
but convicted
I WANT TO REPEAT THIS ONE MORE TIME ( I posted this refuting “millhouse”
regarding trumps trial :
New York’s Adult Survivor’s Act went into effect Thursday, allowing survivors of sexual assault or abuse who were 18 years or older at the time to file a civil lawsuit against their abuser past the state’s statute of limitations.
you are again disingenuous
the law was extended to ACCOMMODATE A MEANS TO AN END DIRECTLY AGAINST TRUMP
Thats the Equivalent of “making another law” and directing a law specifically against someone
ARTICLE 1 SECTION 9
CLAUSE 3
The clause thus prohibits all legislative acts, “no matter what their form, that apply either to named individuals or to easily ascertainable members of a group in such a way as to inflict punishment on them without a judicial trial. . . .”
so NY DIRECTLY MADE A LAW BY EXTENDING THE STATUTE AND SO THAT THEY COULD THEN
AFTER THE FACT ( of creating that new law) GO AFTER TRUMP
And you are once again full of shit. The law had nothing whatsoever to do with Trump. Nobody involved in passing it, supporting it, or opposing it had any idea that someone would end up using it to sue Trump.
Milhouse says a law that _only_ applies to Trump, passed by a legislature of Democrat extremists, had nothing to do with Trump. Milhouse, you’re a _pitiful_ liar.