Monday morning saw Judge Aileen Cannon in Florida dismiss the classified documents case. Of course, liberal pundits are losing their minds.

The other case that was on hold, but in theory is still open, is the January 6 case in the D.C. district. All liberal hopes and dreams now turn to that case moving forward.

I am not going to dive into the numerous issues with all this, but focus on the SCOTUS opinion regarding presidential immunity and how it just might generally impact even that D.C. case.

There are a few lines from that opinion that can be highlighted for the discussion:

"Given all these circumstances, it is particularly in­cumbent upon us to be mindful of our frequent admonition that “[o]urs is a court of final review and not first view.”

As a non-lawyer, I read this to be, the Supreme Court is not supposed to deal with new and novel issues that have not been thoroughly briefed and considered by the lower courts. They are supposed to review the work of other courts, and determine if the courts erred or not. This precedent is nothing new. But it is interesting that the decision rendered mentions this point.

"Despite the unprecedented nature of this case, and the very significant constitutional questions that it raises, the lower courts rendered their decisions on a highly expedited basis. Because those courts categorically rejected any form of Presidential immunity, they did not analyze the conduct alleged in the indictment to decide which of it should be cat­egorized as official and which unofficial. Neither party has briefed that issue before us (though they discussed it at oral argument in response to questions)."

Again, as a non-lawyer, I read this section to be a shot at the trial and appellate courts -- you rushed to judgement, and you did not do your homework. There is no file for the Supreme Court to review and comment on. The D.C. trial court and the D.C. Court of Appeals seemed intent on dismissing any arguments from President Trump as quickly as possible to maintain a political calendar. It seems that the Supreme Court is specifically calling out the other courts for allowing new and novel issues to avoid briefing and to come before the court without the proper documentation. "Do your job" would seem to be the sentiment, and if you won't do your job, you will force us to continue to overturn your decisions.

I think not enough emphasis on these statements has occurred. Taken with the first statement, I think this is a total admonishment to the D.C. trial court and the D.C. Court of Appeals. It was also a warning: don't fast track these decisions to stay on a political calendar. The courts are supposed to be the neutral arbiters, and rushing to maintain a political calendar would embroil the court in politics in a way the Supreme Court is not comfortable. The court system is slow and ponderous, and in theory should get to the proper results with thorough and thoughtful consideration.

It follows that the Florida case is dead. I don't see how even on appeal, they can resurrect the case before the election. SCOTUS said, don't rush, and thoroughly brief the matters.

Judge Cannon is getting a lot of flak from liberal pundits. If you look at the record, she was more thoughtful and thorough than any judge handling a President Trump case to date. Maybe, she is overturned on appeal, and maybe not. But the appeals court will not be able to say she did not thoroughly brief and consider the matter, unlike the D.C. trial court.

The D.C. case is also dead. If the D.C. court and Court of Appeals does not thoroughly brief and consider these issues on a normal court calendar, the Supreme Court is signaling that they will be ready to dunk on the courts involved. In the decision, they told the court you must weigh all the legal issues before this proceeds.

There remains hope that this will all eventually go away. Jack Smith wants to rush through all the issues for political interests, not justice. The D.C. trial court has appeared to want to rush through all the issues, and seems to have the support of the D.C. Court of appeals. The Supreme Court would seem to be warning them to slow down and be thorough, and that is exactly what "they" don't want to do.

With the slapdown from the Supreme Court, I think even the D.C. trial court will get the message, and if this case moves along at a regular court calendar pace, this case is not going anywhere before election day. And, that will be a good thing for America.

Maker S. Mark (a pseudonym) is a patriot who can understand and explain advanced math and science, and is worried about the state of the nation and how to solve the problems we face. United we stand, divided we fall.

Image: APK