Trump's Immunity Syndrome

 So last week the Supreme Court took up arguments from Donald Trump's legal team that Trump is due total immunity from prosecution for actions taken while he was President. 

Previously judiciary rulings on this matter by lower courts have all been consistent in the answer to the question of Trump having total immunity from prosecution: No.  He does NOT have total immunity from prosecution.

Instead of being a settled issue, the Supreme Court chose to weigh in on this and hear Trump's latest appeal.

Besides having a 6 to 3 conservative majority on the court, 3 of those 6 justices were appointed by Donald Trump. 

And one other justice (Clarence Thomas) has a wife (Ginni Thomas) who deeply involved in helping Trump overturn the results of the 2020 election. Quite frankly, ethics would suggest that Thomas should recuse himself but Thomas is forever giving a big old "fuck you" to ethical considerations.    

And there is Samuel Alito who never met a hard line conservative position he didn't like. 

One might be worried the fix is in.  

Could Donald Trump get his total immunity? 

Unlike the U.S. Senate which seems to be able to ignore it's own rules and traditions to keep Trump out of trouble through TWO impeachments, the Supreme Court conservatives will have to find some point of constitutional law to hang its hat on if they want to confer absolute immunity to Führer Donald Trump.  

There are three potential outcomes. 

1) The conservative majority rules that Trump has total immunity. From what I've read on the matter, virtually all legal experts agree there is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that will grant total immunity. Even if one moves from the actual text to the intent of the framers of the Constitution, well, they just fought a war to free themselves from a ruler with absolute power and no consequences for the abuse of that power. They surely would not want to give such unilateral power to the President.

2) The conservative majority rules that Trump has some limited  immunity but only for acts relating to official Presidential business. They could order the federal cases pending against Trump to be kicked back down the chain to re-review to determine that the specific actions Trump took were indeed in service to his office as President or in service to his role as a candidate.  This would still count as a win for Trump has this would further delay the proceedings to the point of going past the November election and God help us if Trump wins, it will all be a moot point because Trump will shut it all down once he is in the Oval Office again.  

3) At least 2 of the conservative judges agree with the 3 liberal justices that the lower courts AND 99.99% of American legal scholars have it right and Trump does NOT have absolute immunity, full stop, don't bother us again with this fuckery.  Not a win for Trump BUT the very act of the Supreme Court agreeing to hear this in the first place has caused delays enough to still help Li'l Donnie in his quest to avoid accountability past the November election.  

If we were dealing with the Supreme Court as a truly impartial ideal as envisioned by our Founding Fathers, there would be zero tension around this question.    

But we have a Supreme Court that is corrupted by money and an emphasis of political ideology over the rule of law and 3 judges who got their damn jobs because of the sniveling coward who is pleading for their help.  

Justice may yet prevail. 

Emphasis on the word "may".