2/ Emptywheel:

Thomas: How do we determine what an official act is?

Ut oh.

3/ Via Scott MacFarlane:

Here comes the first hypothetical question. Chief Justice John Roberts asks ... what about an official act taken by a President (appointing an ambassador)... "for a bribe?"

Roberts - the bribe isn't an official act. But the appointing of an ambassador is one

(NOTE: I’M HAVING ENOUGH PROBLEMS TRYING TO DO ONE THREAD, LET ALONE 2, LET ALONE HAVING A DR APPT SOON… SO I’LL BE CUTTING ALL OF THIS SHORT SOON)

4/ Via MacFarlane:

Justice Sotomayor interjects with next hypothetical.... about what happens if a President orders an assassination.. "for personal reasons"

The DC appeals court used similar hypotheticals in January (Bribes and assassination)

Sotomayor cites amicus briefs received by Supreme Court in this case detailing how founding fathers once considered immunity for President, but didn't include immunity in founding documents of our nation

5/ I’m sure I’ve messed up the thread, and I’m posting when I can.

Elie Mystal:

Every Alito, Thomas, and Gorsuch question is frankly code for "remand."

Roberts is not for remand. This could come down to Barrett.
#SCOTUS

6/ Oy.

Mystal:

Kagan: Can the president order a coup?
Sauer: If it's.. I did the job...
Kagan: CAN THE PRESIDENT ORDER A COUP?
Sauer: YOU'RE GODDAMN RIGHT HE CAN!

7/ Emptywheel:

Kav now imagining that bc none of the statutes charged have a clear statement that POTUS could be charged.

Murder does not have a clear statement.

Scott MacFarlane:

A Trump-appointed Supreme Court Justice (Gorsuch) and Trump's attorney (Sauer) just did a round of hypothesizing about a future President pardoning himself

Both emphasize that such a prospect is untested and uncertain

8/ Emptywheel:

Kav seems set to say POTUS can't be prosecuted FOR ANY OFFICIAL act unless the crime says POTUS can be prosecuted. But may be willing to let DC District to review for official acts.

9/ Mystal:

Gorsuch is basically pulling his questions from Truth social

Barrett kind of moves us to the ridiculous argument that the President must be impeached first before being prosecuted.

And Barrett is *killing* that argument

10/ Mystal:

Folks... I *think* we might have Barrett on team "no immunity, no remand." But I'll have to see how she handles the government's argument before I'm more confident.

Also, Barrett dissembles a lot in oral arguments about her position. She talks one way but often votes another.