We're resending this email from earlier in the week to make sure you
didn't miss it. The stakes truly could not be higher.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi,
What the Supreme Court did this week is an absolute outrage.
By further delaying the criminal trial against Donald Trump for his
attempt to overturn the 2020 election, the Supreme Court has effectively
guaranteed that there will be no trial before the 2024 election.^1
The justices had a choice: uphold the rule of law and the legitimacy of
the Supreme Court, or throw all that away to help one man, Donald Trump.
They chose Trump.
It's now beyond dispute that this Supreme Court is so hopelessly corrupt
that major reforms are urgently needed to restore the fundamental
legitimacy of the Court and save American democracy.
[ [link removed] ]That's why we're asking you now, on this dark day for democracy: Will
you donate $10 to Demand Progress Action and support our
work, including pushing for real Supreme Court ethics reform?
[ [link removed] ]Donate $10
[ [link removed] ]Donate $20
[ [link removed] ]Donate $40
[ [link removed] ]Or, donate another amount
It's been nearly a year since Trump was indicted by a grand jury for
criminally attempting to overturn the 2020 presidential election. The
trial was originally scheduled to start in March.^2 By now, we should be
approaching closing arguments and a verdict.^3
Instead, the Supreme Court stepped in, using the Trump legal team's
laughable argument that the president has total immunity for all crimes
committed while in office, to stop the trial cold.^4
This ruling is a direct result of years of corruption at the Supreme
Court. Millions of dollars in gifts and payments have flowed to the
justices from right-wing and corporate benefactors.^5 Basic judicial rules
of ethics have become a punchline.
Clarence Thomas's wife was personally engaged in the effort to overturn
the election. He had no business participating in this case from the start
due to his obvious conflict of interest.^6 Under typical judicial norms,
Samuel Alito should also have recused himself due to the obvious
perception of bias after it was revealed that pro-MAGA flags had flown in
front of his houses after January 6.^7
Demand Progress has been fighting for Supreme Court reform for years, and
we've mobilized over 100,000 people to contact Congress demanding a
binding code of ethics for the justices. But this is a watershed moment,
and we must turn up the pressure.
[ [link removed] ]Please donate $10 to help Demand Progress Action advocate
for real Supreme Court ethics reform, and push for other key reforms.
With gratitude,
The team at Demand Progress Action
[ [link removed] ]DONATE
Sources:
1. The New York Times, "Supreme Court Says Trump Is Partly Shielded From
Prosecution," [ [link removed] ]July 1, 2024.
2. Politico, "Judge hints at delay for Trump's March trial date in federal
election case," [ [link removed] ]January 18, 2024.
3. Just Security, "When Special Counsel Smith's January 6th Trial Will
Reach a Verdict: Analyzing the Alternative Timelines," [ [link removed] ]March 1, 2024.
4. Slate, "SCOTUS Is Slow-Walking for Trump," [ [link removed] ]March 1, 2024.
5. ProPublica, "Friends of the Court," [ [link removed] ]accessed July 1, 2024.
6. The Washington Post, "Ginni Thomas called 2020 a 'heist.' Clarence
Thomas must recuse himself." [ [link removed] ]December 22, 2023.
7. The New York Times, "Experts Question Alito's Failure to Recuse Himself
in Flag Controversy," [ [link removed] ]May 30, 2024.
----------
PAID FOR BY DEMAND PROGRESS (<a href="[link removed]">DemandProgress.org</a>) and not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. Contributions are not deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes. Join our online community on <b><a href="[link removed]">Facebook</a></b> or <b><a href="[link removed]">Twitter</a>.</b>
You can unsubscribe from this list at any time: [link removed]
