Alvin Bragg played a key role in the Democrats’ campaign of lawfare against Donald Trump.
But Bragg never anticipated what was about to happen.
And the Supreme Court could hand Alvin Bragg one career-killing defeat.
Democrats thought recruiting partisan prosecutors like Bragg, Fani Willis, and Jack Smith into an effort to interfere in the 2024 Presidential election through slapping Donald Trump with criminal indictments would help them hold onto the White House.
However, polls show Trump running neck-and-neck with Joe Biden as it appears voters are looking at the election as a referendum on Joe Biden’s performance in office.
Democrats planned show trials against Trump at the state level in Manhattan and Atlanta so they could guarantee juries packed with Democrats that would convict Trump.
But now that Trump could win the election there is a new problem.
George Washington Law Professor Jonathan Turley told Fox News that should Democrats convict Trump at the state level – on charges where Trump could not pardon himself – the Supreme Court may have to step in and say any attempt to jail Trump would interfere with Presidential functions and stop any effort to incarcerate Trump.
“President Trump, could indeed pardon himself for federal crimes. For the state crimes, it could create some serious complications,” Turley stated. “The court would first have to sentence him to jail. But then federal courts may get involved and to the extent that that would interfere with Presidential functions, we obviously have not been down that road but we have to look towards it. And it is going to be a messy situation the courts are going to have to deal with it.”
Turley also explained that there is no guarantee Trump’s trials will take place before the election due to the flurry of motions and challenges Trump is sure to file and the fact that courts may throw the cases because of the unique Constitutional questions raised by the nature of these cases.
“It is still not clear what trials could occur before the election,” Turley added. “It is also not clear if convictions that were secured would be upheld when they’re challenged. It probably is going to be difficult to bring all of these threshold challenges to the court of appeals before trial. Judges tend to say that you should get a verdict first and then appeal, but there are substantial constitutional questions to be worked out.”
Finally, Turley implied that the fact that all anyone focuses on is what will happen in the event of a Trump conviction is a tacit admission that Democrats plan to stage kangaroo courts where Trump stands no chance of receiving a fair trial.
“Trump could be acquitted. You could have a hung jury. The cases could be thrown out on constitutional grounds,” Turley concluded. “All of those, at least are options worth mentioning for appearances’ sake, if you are a nation committed to the rule of law.”
