You can appeal any federal case to scotus or make an argument that a state case should be federal. However scotus decides what cases they hear. So you can appeal but unless you have a good argument they are simply going to decide to not hear the case.
SCOTUS won’t override a state court on matters of state law. The will always defer to the highest court in each state unless there is a federal question involved.
That’s a total non sequitur, here. Circuit then SCOTUS is the appellate path, as I said. No one has even discussed the merit or likelihood of success of any such appeals.
The Supreme Court has the right to issue certiorari over any case with a few exceptions where Congress has created specific courts to have original jurisdiction. Bankruptcy court is an example as well as immigration court. The question isn’t whether they can but which cases to prioritize given the amount of time they have available each year.
I never said they can’t, I said they won’t unless there is a Federal question. State supreme courts are experts on their state laws and the SCOTUS will not interpret state laws for states.
I literally just gave you an example though. Federal elections are run by the states. The US Supreme Court ruled against the North Carolina Supreme Court regarding that state’s running of elections. They may be federal elections, but it’s completely a state issue.
Or we could talk about their history with state gerrymandering cases?
Especially with this current court, it’s quite the claim to say with such certainty that they will or will not do something. But, historically speaking, you’re wrong.
You gave me an example of…? Your claim is that (with a strange amount of certainty) that the US Supreme Court doesn’t do X. I gave you evidence that they have and will do X. That’s all I needed to do in order to support my claim.
You can’t really prove a negative with examples so I’m not sure what you mean when you say that you also gave examples? Examples of what???
Is every SCOTUS case ever (that isn’t one I mentioned) an example?
Which still doesn’t matter, because SCOTUS doesn’t get involved in civil cases unless there’s some kind of constitutional question, and there is none here.
i think its stock only, there are a ton of restrictions like he cant sell immediately.. so maybe no immediate cash out and hopefully in the meantime the price tanks to pennies so it becomes worthless
This is the 2nd defamation trial (the first being 5 million iirc). The 400+ million one was the NY fraud trial for inflating the value of his properties. It is hard to keep track of them :)
Bonds aren’t insurance policies. They’re guarantees that the full amount will be paid to those owed the money. In the end, Trump will still have to pay if he loses the appeal. If Chubb has to pay instead, they can start seizing and selling Trump assets to cover the full value of the bond.
Sadly Chubbs bond was backed by a Schwab account of assets as collateral. So stocks and bonds, not real estate. Chubb shot down accepting any Trump real estate as collateral.
To be clear, this was a denial to have the verdict set aside and to order a new trial, this was not a judgement on the appeal, which has yet to be launched.
Add comment