The Supreme Court rejected Missouri’s lawsuit against New York over the prosecution of former President Donald Trump on Monday.
Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey sued the state of New York in July, alleging its prosecution of Trump violated the First Amendment right of Missouri citizens to hear from a 2024 presidential candidate. In a brief order, the Supreme Court declined to allow Missouri to file its complaint and dismissed its motion for preliminary relief.
Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito would have allowed Missouri to file its complaint but “would not grant other relief,” according to the order.
It’s disappointing that the Supreme Court refused to exercise its constitutional responsibility to resolve state v. state disputes.
I will continue to prosecute our lawsuit against @KamalaHarris @JoeBiden’s DOJ for coordinating the illicit prosecutions against President Trump
— Attorney General Andrew Bailey (@AGAndrewBailey) August 5, 2024
“No doubt it is true that the Constitution would not have tolerated a future Confederate state gagging and sentencing Abraham Lincoln in 1860 to interfere with his campaign for the Presidency,” Missouri’s lawsuit stated. “Doing so obviously would have interfered with federal interests the same way Maryland’s attempt to tax the Bank of the United States did 40 years earlier.”
“Constitutionally, it is no different with New York’s attempt to use coercive power in the form of a gag order and impending sentence to interfere with Donald Trump’s campaign,” the lawsuit continued.
A Manhattan jury convicted Trump late May on 34 counts for falsifying business records.
Judge Juan Merchan has only partially lifted the gag order he placed on Trump, leaving in place restrictions that prevent Trump from criticizing prosecutors in Bragg’s office. A New York appeals court rejected last week Trump’s bid to lift the order following the trial’s completion.
Merchan found Trump in violation of the order ten times over the course of the trial. Trump’s sentencing is scheduled to take place on September 18, a delay from the initial July date prompted by the Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity.
“It’s disappointing that the Supreme Court refused to exercise its constitutional responsibility to resolve state v. state disputes,” Bailey said in a statement on X. “I will continue to prosecute our lawsuit against @KamalaHarris @JoeBiden’s DOJ for coordinating the illicit prosecutions against President Trump.”
This is a breaking news story and will be updated.
(Featured image credit: Screen Capture/Supreme Court of the United States)
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact [email protected].
