Seth Abramson @SethAbramson Lawyer. Professor @UofNH. Columnist @Newsweek. NYT bestselling author. Proof of Conspiracy, @StMartinsPress: t.co/iK2Sbuee4H. Analyses @BBC. Views mine. Apr. 24, 2019 1 min read

Wouldn't the statute of limitations arguably *toll* during any period an individual is unavailable to be indicted (e.g., during occupancy of the White House)? I can't imagine any federal prosecutor *not* making this argument, as otherwise Trump would *literally* be above the law.

1/ If DOJ regulations allowed federal prosecutors to indict a president now and prosecute him or her later (after their presidency had ended) things might be a bit different, but it doesn't—and besides which, such a process could give rise to a solid speedy trial claim for Trump.

2/ @tribelaw, can you shed any light on this?

3/ Trump could argue DOJ—executive branch—regs can't toll the operation a legislative act (statute). But in that case, doesn't it invalidate the regs, making Trump—as executive branch head—responsible for their invalidity, and give a prosecutor grounds to say Trump can't benefit?


You can follow @SethAbramson.



Bookmark

____
Tip: mention @threader_app on a Twitter thread with the keyword “compile” to get a link to it.

Enjoy Threader? Sign up.