The U.S. Supreme Court lit off a firestorm. Americans are seriously livid.
That’s why the U.S. Supreme Court Justices just got skewered by a Fox News lawyer for this huge mistake.
The U.S. Supreme Court denied the Donald Trump legal team’s appeal for the sentencing in the New York “hush money” case to be delayed and/or cancelled. Instead, Donald Trump got sentenced, officially, as a “convicted” felon. The consequences were laughable because there virtually were none. He won’t serve any jail or prison time, and he can even choose to pardon himself when he takes office in a handful of days from now.
The real problem is that the U.S. Supreme Court let a case that many agree is simply bogus go to sentencing. The U.S. Supreme Court Justices were even split on this matter, with four of the Justices saying that they would have granted Trump’s request for the sentencing to be delayed or cancelled. Unfortunately, they were outweighed with a simple High Court majority of the other five Justices upholding the sentencing date.
Mark Levin Criticizes Supreme Court’s Ruling on Trump Case: Claims Justices “Got Played”
Fox News host Mark Levin sharply criticized the U.S. Supreme Court for not halting the sentencing of President-elect Donald Trump in a contentious case involving 34 counts of falsifying business records. Levin’s remarks came after the Court, in a 5-4 ruling, declined to intervene in the case, with Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett among those who voted against halting the proceedings.
In his Friday appearance on America’s Newsroom, Levin expressed his belief that the Supreme Court had failed to uphold justice in this matter, accusing the justices of being manipulated by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg. Levin’s criticism was particularly aimed at Roberts and Barrett, who, alongside Justices Elena Kagan, Ketanji Brown Jackson, and Sonia Sotomayor, chose not to take up the case. He argued that their decision effectively legitimized a “corrupt process” and allowed an unjust legal proceeding to continue unchecked.
“This will be remembered as an absolute injustice from the beginning,” Levin said. He went on to acknowledge that he had not been able to follow the commentary on the case due to a medical appointment, but stressed that there were important legal points to consider regarding the court’s reluctance to intervene. “The problem here, and I think the four other justices on the court, originalists, understood it, was crucial the Supreme Court take up this case the way they took up Bush versus Gore because it is the most extraordinarily outrageous case in modern times,” Levin stated.
He contended that the decision was not just a missed opportunity for the Court but an outright failure to address a highly significant case. Levin expressed his belief that the Supreme Court had a critical responsibility to defend both the federal judiciary and the Constitution. He also lambasted the role of New York’s legal system, describing it as “highly corrupt” and “highly partisan,” accusing it of orchestrating the entire case from the outset.
Levin emphasized that the Court had an obligation to step in and protect the integrity of the judicial system, particularly in a case involving a future president of the United States. He pointed out that four justices had expressed interest in taking up the case, with legal arguments presented not only by Trump’s defense team but also by former Attorney General Edwin Meese, who filed an amicus brief in support of the appeal.
In explaining what he saw as the Supreme Court’s failure to act, Levin compared the current situation to past cases where the Court intervened, particularly citing Bush v. Gore as an example of the Court’s willingness to take action in politically charged cases. “This court, if it had Rehnquist as the chief justice or had Scalia on this court, it would have been a six-three, taken the case and fixed it,” Levin argued. “What do I mean by fixed it? Depending on what the state appellate courts do, this case is going back to the Supreme Court. Now, what’s the Supreme Court going to say? We aren’t going to take it? Of course they’ll take it. What will they say then?”
Levin’s comments also touched on the serious implications of the Court’s refusal to intervene. He noted that, while appellate courts in New York had also declined to halt the sentencing hearing, the Supreme Court’s decision effectively “gave their imprimatur to the process.” By allowing the legal proceedings to move forward, Levin suggested, the Court had sent a message that it was willing to let what he described as a “corrupt process” unfold.
He further criticized the timing of the decision, emphasizing that the case was tied to an incoming president, which would allow the appellate process to continue while Trump potentially served in office. “You don’t let a corrupt process that these gentlemen have been talking about from beginning to end play out, particularly when you are talking about an incoming president of the United States where the appellate process for this corrupt process will be going on while he is president of the United States,” Levin argued.
The case, which resulted in Trump’s conviction on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records, has been one of the most high-profile legal battles involving the former president. Despite Levin’s criticism, the legal process continues, with the potential for further appeals and reviews in the future. The Supreme Court’s decision to allow the case to proceed without taking immediate action sets a precedent that could shape the outcome of the legal proceedings and future challenges related to the case.
In his closing remarks, Levin reiterated that the Supreme Court had a “rare responsibility” to step in and correct the course of the legal process, claiming that the precedent set by this ruling would have lasting consequences for the integrity of the justice system.
Donald Trump’s response to the ruling was calmer than some predicted. He thanked the Justices for their time reviewing the case but said that he thinks they should have intervened considering so many legal experts have argued that the New York “hush money” case was a bunch of nonsense from the beginning, including Leftist legal experts as well.
“I appreciate the time and effort of the United States Supreme Court in trying to remedy the great injustice done to me by the highly conflicted ‘Acting Justice,’ who should not have been allowed to try this case. Every Legal Scholar stated, unequivocally, that this is a case that should never have been brought. There was no case against me. In other words, I am innocent of all the Judge’s made up, fake charges,” Donald Trump shared after the news.
Look at President Trump's response to the Supreme Court's super betrayal. VERY MERCIFUL & CALM!
He also says, "For the sake and sanctity of the Presidency, I will be appealing this case, and am confident that JUSTICE WILL PREVAIL. The pathetic, dying remnants of the Witch Hunts… pic.twitter.com/Hnp1lpfQWm
— George (@BehizyTweets) January 10, 2025
Stay tuned to the DC Daily Journal.
