well-temperedforum.groupee.net
SCOTUS rules on I-1's tax returns (edit: and other stuff)

This topic can be found at:
http://well-temperedforum.groupee.net/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/9130004433/m/2213995597

22 February 2021, 10:51 AM
wtg
SCOTUS rules on I-1's tax returns (edit: and other stuff)
quote:
The U.S. Supreme Court declined Monday to block a New York grand jury from getting President Donald Trump's personal and corporate tax returns, a decisive defeat in his prolonged legal battle to keep his tax records out of the hands of investigators.

The ruling does not mean the returns will become public any time soon, and they might never be publicly released. Under state law, materials turned over to a grand jury must be kept secret. But Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance can now require Trump's accountants to turn over the records that the president has steadfastly refused to surrender to prosecutors or Congress.


https://www.nbcnews.com/politi...ing-trump-s-n1258498


--------------------------------
Outrage is warranted. But outrage unaccompanied by analysis is a danger in itself.

Bazootiehead-in-training



22 February 2021, 11:37 AM
wtg
quote:
The U.S. Supreme Court has passed up yet another opportunity to wade into disputes over last year’s presidential election.

The justices on Monday declined to take up cases challenging a Pennsylvania state court decision that extended the ballot-receipt deadline in last November’s election by three days due to the coronavirus pandemic.

Former President Donald Trump and the Pennsylvania Republican Party were among those urging the justices to grant review of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling. Only about 10,000 ballots arrived during the three-day window, well short of the number that could have imperiled Joe Biden’s 80,555-vote victory in the Keystone state.

The justices offered no public explanation for their rejection of the cases, but one member of the court, Justice Clarence Thomas, dissented. He said the court should have granted review, even though the dispute was effectively moot, and he took a swipe at his colleagues for the decision to pass up the cases.


https://www.politico.com/news/...ction-dispute-470827


--------------------------------
Outrage is warranted. But outrage unaccompanied by analysis is a danger in itself.

Bazootiehead-in-training



22 February 2021, 03:21 PM
Nina
Too bad, so sad. "His" scotus doesn't seem to agree that they need to do his bidding.

Anyone else shocked (not) at Thomas' dissent on the PA case?