In a discussion that has sparked speculation and intrigue, Arthur Fergenson, a highly respected former judicial clerk for the late Chief Supreme Court Justice Warren Burger, suggests that former President Donald Trump could potentially appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court if convicted in his New York trial. This suggestion adds another layer of complexity to Trump’s ongoing legal battles and underscores the high stakes at hand.
Arthur Fergenson’s Insightful Conversation
Fergenson shared his intriguing insights during a conversation with conservative commentator Mark Levin. He discussed how Trump could take his fight all the way to the Supreme Court using both statutory writs of certiorari and other legal procedures known as common law writs. Fergenson clarified that these seldom-used instruments allow the Supreme Court to review cases from lower appellate courts, adding another dimension of suspense to Trump’s legal saga.
The Role of Judiciary Act of 1789
In addition to statutory writs of certiorari, Fergenson pointed out that common law writs authorized by the Judiciary Act of 1789 could also be used. These legal procedures provide an additional framework for potential Supreme Court intervention.
Questioning Due Process in Trump’s Case
Central to Fergenson’s argument is his assertion that there has been a violation of due process in Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s case against Trump. He believes Bragg escalated misdemeanor bookkeeping charges into felonies under COVID-era statutes without identifying an underlying crime justifying these charges as felonies. This situation, according to Fergenson, warrants immediate intervention by the Supreme Court.
Fergenson Draws Parallels with Historic Cases
Fergenson further compared this situation with infamous Stalin show trials where individuals were prosecuted without knowledge of their accused crimes. He also drew parallels between Trump’s case and the landmark Bush v. Gore decision, suggesting the Supreme Court could step in to protect American democracy.
The Implications of Fergenson’s Comments
Fergenson’s comments have sparked a flurry of conversation and anticipation for a potentially dramatic courtroom battle with significant implications for U.S politics. As we approach the trial, the possibility of Supreme Court intervention adds another layer of complexity to an already charged political environment. Whether or not the Supreme Court will intervene remains uncertain, but it is clear that Fergenson’s insights suggest potential legal strategies that could influence future American jurisprudence.
Leave a Comment