IF I were on the court:
Fellow justices, with an appeals court decision that is airtight, with an amicus brief, from retired generals no less, and with Special Counsel arguments just concluded I move that we rule 'denied' sooner rather than later.
Why, SOME of you may ask. Because we already unnecessarily delayed the hearing of arguments in this case because, again, the Appeals Court f'ing nailed it. (Remember it's ME on the Court.😏)
Delaying our decision until just before we adjourn for the summer in June awards Mr. Trump de facto immunity before the election, by making the timing of a trial problematic, and thereby may influence the election in a way that the DOJ precludes itself from doing, 60 days before an election. The latter does not apply here because the DOJ guideline only applies to bringing indictments within that time frame. Still, a trial that goes to a jury in late Oct; do we want THAT?
Lastly, the wider American public may regard our actions as justice delayed, justice denied. Do we really NEED to take a hit like that on our already tarnished rating among that public?
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
