Connect with us

Georgia

U.S. Supreme Court immunity ruling likely further delays Fulton racketeering case • Georgia Recorder

Published

on

U.S. Supreme Court immunity ruling likely further delays Fulton racketeering case • Georgia Recorder


A U.S. Supreme Court decision Monday establishing a legal standard for presidential immunity could further slow down Georgia’s 2020 presidential election interference case, several legal experts predict.

The nation’s highest court ruling Monday shields U.S. presidents from criminal prosecution while engaging in “official” conduct related to their “core constitutional” presidential acts and removes immunity if the conduct is unrelated to their “unofficial” responsibilities. The ruling is in response to a federal election interference case brought by the U.S. Department of Justice against Trump, who is accused of allegedly plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

According to the majority opinion written by Chief Justice John Roberts, Trump’s claim of blanket presidential immunity was rejected and a legal test was established as to what type of presidential conduct is protected under the U.S. Constitution.

Several other pending criminal cases against Trump will be affected by Monday’s ruling, including a case in Fulton County Superior Court where Trump and 14 co-defendants are accused of committing felonies while conspiring to rig the 2020 presidential election.

Advertisement

The Supreme Court decision is another blow to the already minimal chances of jury selection in the Fulton election interference case beginning prior to the Nov. 5 presidential election. The fight over immunity is expected to draw out the case into 2025, with multiple court motions and appeals taking place, according to Anthony Michael Kreis, a law professor at Georgia State University.

The Supreme Court ruling doesn’t directly impact Trump’s co-defendants in Georgia, which include several members of Trump’s inner circle, former Trump attorneys, and other Republican allies. Four of his indicted co-defendants pleaded guilty last year reached agreements with prosecutors that will let them avoid jail time if they cooperate as state witnesses.

Legal experts say two of the eight the acts detailed in DOJ indictment could be significantly impacted by the Supreme Court’s decision.

Kreis also said it’s likely that several of the key Trump’s interactions listed in the Fulton indictment, including a post-election phone call with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, will be considered outside the scope of presidential authority.

“The Supreme Court’s decision on presidential immunity makes state prosecutions of presidents for unlawful acts to subvert a presidential election even more important now because the evidence from state prosecutions will be focused on extra-federal executive conduct,” Kreis wrote on X Monday.

Advertisement

The way in which the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling is applied in the Justice Department’s Washington D.C. election interference case could serve as a template for the Fulton County case, according to legal experts.

Fulton Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee will have to determine whether Trump’s interactions with federal and state officials are protected from criminal prosecution as official presidential duties.

In both the DOJ and Fulton cases, Trump is accused of illegally pressuring Raffensperger in January 2021 to overturn Georgia’s election results and of obstructing the certification of the election by arranging for a false slate of Republican electors to meet in December 2020 to vote for Trump.

Previous federal court rulings in Georgia can give some guidance as U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan holds hearings to determine how immunity will be applied in Trump’s D.OJ. case, according to CNN analyst Norm Eisen, who served as legal counsel in the first impeachment trial of Trump.

Last year, Atlanta-based federal Judge Steve Jones rejected requests from Fulton co-defendants, former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark, who wanted their case moved to federal court under claims they were acting in their official roles as federal officers.

Advertisement

Jones ruled Clark and Meadows’ criminal charges weren’t related to their federal jobs, including Meadows’ role in setting up the infamous Trump recorded phone call with Georgia’s election chief several weeks after the 2020 election.

“The issues at play in the Georgia removal proceedings are strikingly similar to the ones Chutkan will be forced to consider with respect to Trump,” Eisen wrote Monday’s opinion column published by CNN. “The Supreme Court has explicitly directed Chutkan to determine whether Trump’s interactions with state officials and private parties were official and left open the door for her to hold hearings over allegations that involved Pence, too.”

”Chutkan can give both parties the opportunity to develop facts supporting their competing positions and then make her ruling on immunity, ensuring that Trump continues to receive due process throughout,“ Eisen said.

The Fulton case is on hold while the Georgia Court of Appeals reviews McAfee’s decision to reject defense attorneys’ arguments that Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis should be removed from the case because her romantic relationship with special prosecutor Nathan Wade constituted prosecutorial misconduct. Willis hired Wade to lead the probe in November 2021 and she contends the relationship started after they started working on the case.

In August, a Fulton County grand jury indicted Trump and 18 others for allegedly conspiring to overturn the 2020 Georgia presidential election results. President Joe Biden’s win was confirmed by multiple recounts and audits, and all court challenges to the result were unsuccessful.

Advertisement

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Advertisement



Source link

Georgia

Georgia Hollows Out Right to Peaceful Assembly

Published

on

Georgia Hollows Out Right to Peaceful Assembly


Georgia’s ruling party has introduced new legislation that would dramatically weaken protections for peaceful assembly, further shrinking democratic space and flouting basic human rights standards guaranteed by the country’s constitution and international law.

The bill, tabled on December 8, is being reviewed under an expedited procedure without a substantiated justification for bypassing the ordinary legislative timeline.

The bill’s provisions would significantly broaden the requirement that protest organizers submit written notification before holding an assembly. Current law requires prior notification five days before the protest only when it would block a road used by automobile traffic. The new bill would extend this requirement to any roadway intended for vehicles or pedestrians. In practice, the obligation would arise for almost all assemblies held on city streets, near administrative buildings, or around political institutions, severely limiting the ability to organize protests.

The draft law would also grant the police wide discretion to impose binding instructions on the time, location, or route of assemblies. These instructions could be justified on broad grounds including “protecting public order,” ensuring the normal functioning of institutions, preventing obstruction of pedestrian or vehicle movement, or allegedly protecting human rights. The vague phrasing of these provisions increases the risk of authorities’ arbitrary interference and unjustified restrictions on peaceful gatherings.

Advertisement

The bill also introduces harsh new penalties for administrative offenses related to assemblies. Failure to submit advance notification—currently punishable by a 2,000-Georgian lari (about US$742) fine—would carry up to 20 days of administrative detention. Failure to comply with a police order to relocate or terminate an assembly would be punishable by up to 15 days of detention for protest participants or up to 20 days for organizers. Repeated violations would constitute a felony, punishable by up to one year in prison for participants and up to four years for organizers.

The bill’s introduction comes at a time of intensifying efforts by Georgia’s authorities to curb pro-democracy protests. By expanding prior-notification requirements, increasing police discretion, and imposing severe penalties, the new legal provisions would effectively hollow out the right to peaceful assembly.

The Georgian government should withdraw the bill and ensure all regulation of public assemblies fully complies with democratic standards and Georgia’s human rights obligations.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Georgia

Georgia Football Coaches Up for Prestigious College Football Awards

Published

on

Georgia Football Coaches Up for Prestigious College Football Awards


Georgia football coaches Kirby Smart and Mike Bobo are up for some prestigious awards.

The Georgia Bulldogs are fresh off an SEC title, their second one in as many years, after defeating the Alabama Crimson Tide by a final score of 28-7. Georgia is now in the hunt for a national title as the No. 3 seed in the college football playoffs.

A very successful season for the Bulldogs thus far, and as a result, two of their coaches are up for very prestigious awards.

Advertisement

Kirby Smart was announced a finalist for the Eddie Robinson Coach of the Year Award and offensive coordinator Mike Bobo was announced as one of five finalist for the Broyles Award.

Kirby Smart and Mike Bobo Named Award Finalists

Advertisement

Georgia Offensive Coordinator Coordinator Mike Bobo enters Sanford Stadium at the dawg walk before the start of a NCAA college football game against Marshall in Athens, Ga., on Saturday, August. 30, 2025. | Joshua L. Jones / USA TODAY NETWORK via Imagn Images

Advertisement

The Eddie Robinson Award dates back to 1997. Smart would be the first ever coach to win the award. Last year’s winner was Alabama head coach Kalen DeBoer. Smart has been named SEC Coach of the Year three times during his time at Georgia, but he has never been acknowledged as the nation’s best coach in a season, despite having two national titles.

One award that Smart has won before is the Broyles award, which is what Bobo is a finalist for. Bobo would become just the second Georgia coach to ever win the award. The first to do so was Brian VanGorder, who won the award in 2003 as the defensive coordinator for the Bulldogs.

Georgia’s offense this season is averaging 31.9 points per game, 406.9 yards of offense per game, 186.6 rushing yards per game and 220.3 passing yards per game. Bobo has helped revamp Georgia’s offense this season after having some struggles just a season ago.

On top of that, Bobo has accomplished that with a first-year starting quarterback in Gunner Stockton and nearly a complete overhaul at offensive line due to players leaving for the NFL draft. The Bulldogs are one of the most efficient offenses in the country and Bobo has played a large role in that.

Advertisement

Coach Smart and Coach Bobo are now looking to help lead the Bulldogs to their third national title since Smart took over. They will play the winner of the Ole Miss vs Tulane game in the Sugar Bowl on Jan. 1. If the Bulldogs advance, they will play the winner of Ohio State and Texas A&M/Miami. Georgia was awarded a first-round bye after winning the SEC Championship.

More from Bulldogs on SI:

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Georgia

Raffensperger sues to overturn Georgia fundraising limits, says law gives Lt. Gov. Burt Jones unfair advantage

Published

on

Raffensperger sues to overturn Georgia fundraising limits, says law gives Lt. Gov. Burt Jones unfair advantage


Georgia’s secretary of state is taking his fight over campaign money to federal court, and the outcome could reshape one of the state’s most-watched statewide races.

Brad Raffensperger filed a lawsuit this week challenging Georgia’s campaign-finance structure, arguing the current rules create an uneven playing field that benefits one candidate in particular: Lt. Gov. Burt Jones, who is already campaigning for governor and raising millions through a special leadership committee.

The issue centers on a 2021 law that allows certain top officeholders, including the governor and lieutenant governor, to raise unlimited funds through these committees. Those accounts can coordinate directly with campaigns and do not face the $8,400 contribution caps placed on traditional candidate committees.

Raffensperger, who is exploring a run for governor himself, says that distinction violates the Constitution.

Advertisement

He isn’t asking the court to shut down leadership committees. Instead, he wants every candidate to have the same ability to raise unlimited funds — essentially lifting the caps for all campaigns.

Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger attends a news conference for Gov. Brian Kemp in 2020.

Dustin Chambers / Bloomberg via Getty Images


A fundraising gap already shaping the 2026 race

Jones’ leadership committee has become one of the most powerful fundraising vehicles in Georgia politics, hauling in more than $14 million as he campaigns statewide.

Advertisement

Previous lawsuits have challenged the same law, including by former U.S. Sen. David Perdue, with mixed results. And earlier this year, a judge dismissed Attorney General Chris Carr’s attempt to block Jones from using his committee, keeping the current system intact.

That decision cleared the path for Jones to continue raising unlimited cash while potential challengers remain capped.

What Raffensperger wants and what could change

If Raffensperger wins, Georgia’s political landscape could shift dramatically:

  • Every candidate for statewide office could raise unlimited money.
  • Leadership committees may lose their outsized influence.
  • Donors and campaigns would need to rethink spending strategies ahead of the 2026 primaries.

If he loses, the existing system — and Jones’ advantage — stays in place.

Election-law experts say Georgia’s framework is one of the most aggressive in the country when it comes to allowing unlimited coordination between leadership committees and campaigns.

A lawsuit with political stakes beyond 2026

The suit arrives at a moment when Georgia continues to be a national battleground for political fundraising, dark-money operations and election reform. It also signals Raffensperger’s growing willingness to challenge the Republican establishment, a posture that has defined much of his tenure since the 2020 election.

Advertisement

A court date has not yet been set. But any ruling will have immediate consequences for the 2026 governor’s race and the balance of political power at the state Capitol.

CBS News Atlanta will continue to follow this lawsuit as new filings and rulings emerge.



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending