I've seen the suggestion that egregiousness of this verdict will likely expand Supreme Court's coming ruling on Presidential Immunity. Since these charges are from 2017, they could fall under the scope of their ruling.
I'm still trying to wrap my head around how a payment made after Trump was elected in 2016 and multiple years before he announced his candidacy for 2020 could be election interference.
Not only that, but this is the first time ever that a state prosecutor has charged violations of federal election laws as a direct or predicate state crime. Probably because state prosecutors have no business charging federal election laws.
I've seen the suggestion that egregiousness of this verdict will likely expand Supreme Court's coming ruling on Presidential Immunity. Since these charges are from 2017, they could fall under the scope of their ruling.
I'm still trying to wrap my head around how a payment made after Trump was elected in 2016 and multiple years before he announced his candidacy for 2020 could be election interference.
Not only that, but this is the first time ever that a state prosecutor has charged violations of federal election laws as a direct or predicate state crime. Probably because state prosecutors have no business charging federal election laws.