Dina’s Docket: Weekly Trump Recap (3/1/24)

Friday, March 1, 2024

Another week, another round of updates in the many ongoing Trump trials. (The nonpartisan nonprofit JUST SECURITY has a fabulous master calendar of key dates in Trump’s trials.)

NEW YORK

This week in Trump legal news, an appellate court in New York said that, quote, Mr. Trump has insufficient assets to pay the judgment, end quote. This is despite Mr. Trump saying in public he had hundreds of millions of dollars in cash. But when it came down to a court filing, he admitted he did it. He does not have the cash to pay the $464 million judgment against him in New York, which means that he can now either get a loan, which the court allowed him, despite the lower courts ruling or assets will be seized by the attorney general.

THE SUPREME COURT

The Supreme Court making the big decision to hear oral arguments in President Trump's immunity case April 22nd, which means there is quite a bit of delay in deciding the immunity issue, which in itself sometimes delay is in itself a miscarriage of justice. What will be in front of the court? The court is going to answer the question of whether or not a president has immunity for an alleged official conduct.

We know the precedent says that presidents are immune from civil liability for official conduct. Now, the question about criminal, I don't see how an official conduct can have immunity from criminal, because by nature, a criminal act should not be an official act. Police officers might be a good example of this. If they are shooting a suspect, they can be criminally charged for that, but not always, because sometimes it is part of their official act.

But that's up to a fact finder to decide. 

GEORGIA

The funny will is here and concluded today with legal arguments from both side. The defense trying to argue that just an apparent conflict of interest was enough. And evidently the evidence should be, you know what? When you see it, this is the type of argument somebody makes when the evidence is not very strong, which is why the prosecution was saying it should be an actual conflict of interest.

Because when the stakes are this high, you're removing an elected D.A. and not only in this case, but maybe in every case, it should be an actual conflict of interest and went through step by step the flaws in their evidence.

Have questions about what’s going on in Trump’s trials? Email me at press@askdinadoll.com or drop a comment below. Make sure to follow me on social media where I post recap videos every Friday along with a ton of other legal news analysis: @askdinadoll 

©2024 Dina Doll | All rights reserved.