The Supreme Court Rejects Missouri’s Attempt to Intervene in Trump’s Criminal Case

The High Court’s Decision

The Supreme Court has denied Missouri’s request to intervene in Donald Trump’s New York criminal case, blocking the state’s attempt to sue New York and overturn the former president’s gag order and upcoming sentencing. While Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito expressed support for Missouri’s motion, the court did not provide an explanation for its denial.

Missouri’s Arguments

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey argued that New York’s prosecution of Trump was politically motivated and violated Missouri’s sovereign rights and the constitutional rights of its citizens. He asserted that the prosecution was an attempt to prevent Trump, a potential Republican presidential candidate, from campaigning freely.

New York’s Response

New York Attorney General Letitia James opposed Missouri’s action, arguing that it was based on an ongoing criminal case between the Manhattan District Attorney and Trump and did not present an actual controversy between states.

The Supreme Court’s “Original” Jurisdiction

This type of case falls under the Supreme Court’s “original” jurisdiction, which allows states to sue each other. However, the court has recently been reluctant to hear such cases, with Justices Thomas and Alito dissenting from this trend.

Trump’s Upcoming Sentencing

Trump is expected to be sentenced on September 18th in New York, but not before Judge Juan Merchan rules on whether the Supreme Court’s recent ruling on presidential immunity affects Trump’s guilty verdicts.

Trump’s Gag Order

Trump has also recently lost an appeal of his gag order, preventing him from publicly discussing the case before sentencing.

Implications for Trump

The Supreme Court’s decision is a setback for Trump, as it prevents Missouri from intervening in his case. It remains to be seen how Judge Merchan will rule on the immunity issue and how it will impact Trump’s sentencing.