قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home / US / This Supreme Court case could affect the Mueller probe and reinforce Trump's apology: NPR

This Supreme Court case could affect the Mueller probe and reinforce Trump's apology: NPR



Former FBI director Robert Mueller III was portrayed in 2013 during a forum in New York.

Andrew Burton / Getty Images


Hide caption

Caption switch

Andrew Burton / Getty Images

Former FBI director Robert Mueller III was portrayed in 2013 during a forum in New York.

Andrew Burton / Getty Images

The constitution's double-hazard clause states that someone can not be prosecuted twice for the same crime.

In fact, the Supreme Court has declared for 160 years that separate sovereigns – state and federal governments – can do just that because every sovereign government has its own laws and interests.

Now, the Supreme Court may be prepared to end this long-standing rule – and this could have consequences for the ongoing investigation by President Trump and his relatives of Special Adviser Robert Mueller and his relations with Russia.

In fact, a ruling that prevents such a double indictment could allow some of those convicted in the Mueller probe to get off scot-free if President Trump pardoned them, something that he flirted openly with flirting.

When do double charges arise?

Often there are high-profile cases, often civil cases, where there is a feeling that justice has not been done.

In 1992, after a mostly white jury near riots in suburban Simi Valley, four policemen were acquitted when a black man named Rodney King was shot on video.

The day after the ruling of the state court, Attorney General William Barr stated that "nothing in the state process is binding on us nationwide," and several Months later, prosecutors reimbursed the same police officers for violating King's civil rights.

A more racially mixed federal jury in Los Angeles condemned then two of the officers.

What is the case before the Supreme Court?

The case heard by the court on Thursday is far more profane than the case of the royal police brutality. In 2015, seven years after Terade Gamble was convicted of theft in Alabama, he was stopped by the police for traffic violations.

When the cops found in the car a handgun and two bags of marijuana, he was accused by the state of a law by Alabama that excludes convicted offenders from possessing a firearm.

Gamble pleaded guilty to prosecution charges and was sentenced to one year in prison, with the remainder of his sentence suspended. His subsequent conviction for violating a nearly identical federal law, however, led to another three years in prison.

Gamble appealed the second conviction claiming that it violated the prohibition of double prosecution of the US Constitution for the same crime. However, the lower courts have ruled that the state and state governments have the opportunity to file consecutive charges under the precedents of the Supreme Court.

Now the Gamble case lies before the Supreme Court, where two judges face each other. The end of the ideological spectrum – Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Clarence Thomas – has suggested that it is time to revisit the doctrine of the separate dominions.

A Card That May Be Released from Prison

The case was highlighted by the remarks made by President Trump that he may be his former campaign chairman Paul Manafort and other Trump employees involved in indictments pardoned by Mueller

It has to be noted that this applies only to federal crimes. Under current law, a state such as New York could, for example, prosecute Manafort for the same crimes but use the laws of the state.

The Supreme Court should refuse a double prosecution. "There is a concern that a president of the United States could pardon a person for all crimes in the state," and it would in fact be "an excuse for everything," said Stephen Saltzburg, a professor of law at George Washington University, acting deputy Deputy Attorney General in the governments of Reagan and Bush.

These concerns range from presidents to governors or local prosecutors. They could "bring great gifts to friends or family by rushing to persecute them for certain crimes," Saltzburg emphasized, receiving minimal penalties.

That would "cut off" the possibility of the Federal Government, z The same behavior, especially in corruption cases.

But the Columbia Law School professor, Daniel Richman, who previously headed the Appeals Division of the US Attorney's Office in Manhattan, is not worried about the Manafort case or anything like that.

Manafort said he was "a kind of one-man offender."

Another way: If a prosecutor can not find any other state crime that accuses someone like Manafort, he should do some other job.

Possible state charges include, according to Ri, money laundering or chman real estate fraud, which states that any money laundering transaction is a separate crime, such as any false statement of state form or state tax return.

Similarly, Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean of the University of California, Berkeley School of Law notes that the practical impact of a rule prohibiting separate prosecutors could be relatively low, as federal and state crime usually proves different Require elements.

For example, an acquittal of murder charges before a state court may be followed by a federal prosecutor for violating civil rights of the victim. And while the actual offense – killing – is the same, prosecutors need to prove, for example, racial, ethnic or gender animus.

"Whatever is disputed, when are the elements sufficiently similar?" The second indictment violates the prohibition of the double endangerment of the constitution, said Chemerinsky.

A low-level criminal with a high-stakes case

Terade Gamble, the defendant at the center of the tribunal on Thursday, is the relatively rare defendant charged by the government and the states for just that same crime, but not involved in serious criminal activity.

He was placed under indictment because the US attorney in Alabama and the Obama administration were in danger of criminals with a history of domestic violence and violent gun use. Gamble had in the past terrorized secret partners with a gun. Senators: Saudi Crown Prince was behind Jamal Khashoggi “/>

Gamble's attorneys claim that the double endangerment of the Constitution does not allow the double prosecution and punishment for the same crime, and that the founders of the nation would never have considered an exception It allowed the state and federal governments to bite the public prosecutor's office individually.

They argue that it is time to override the separate rule of domination because it is wrong to begin with, and because "the dramatic federalization of criminal law over the past 60 years has made it almost ridiculous," the presumption that federal and state courts will rarely overlap. "

The Federal Government disagrees with the view that the separate rulers reign almost two centuries ago, and it serves the different and separate interests of state and federal government.

In Washington, there are always rumors about hidden motives in such a case. Indeed, some liberal circles have speculated that one reason why the Trump administration hastened to confirm Brett Kavanaugh before the Supreme Court was his demonstrated affinity for the president's power.

Ironically, the Trump government's Supreme Court preserves the status quo by keeping the doctrine of separate rulers, as well as 36 states, including states that are "red" and "blue" political lean.

Supreme Court has done so However, it has already signaled how seriously it is being considered to reverse its long-standing precedent regarding the double threat – it has extended the time for Thursday's verbal dispute by 20 minutes and shown how seriously it takes the case.

William Conlon contributed to this report.

19659053]
Source link