Opinion on upcoming Gamble vs. US Supreme Court case?

If Gamble is upheld, it will not do what you say. Gamble was tried and convicted of illegal possession of a firearm in a state trial and served one year. The federal government then prosecuted Gamble for the same crime at the federal level, illegal possession of a firearm. He was again convicted and is serving time on the federal conviction.

Gamble argued on appeal that this is unconstitutional double jeopardy. He lost on appeal on the grounds of the 'Dual Sovereignty' exception to the Double Jeopardy Clause. He appealed to the US 11th Circuit, which affirmed the lower court's ruling. Now it is before SCOTUS.

If SCOTUS overrules the 11th circuit and finds for Gamble, it will not prevent a state from going forward with a prosecution unless a defendant in federal court is tried, regardless of the outcome, reaches a conclusion, then the state cannot bring the same charge. If the federal government decides to drop the charge and not go to trial, there is no double jeopardy - facing two separate punishments for the same crime. The state may bring its case. And of course, there is no overturning a pardon. The reverse holds true for the federal government when the state goes first, as in this case.

I would agree that a person should not pay two separate punishments for the same crime and that that SCOTUS needs to look at whether the 'dual sovereignty' exception to the Double Jeopardy Clause should be overturned, as even past SCOTUS rulings seem to indicate that this exception is not acting in the way the Founders intended.

Read this:

https://www.theusconstitution.org/litigation/gambl...

Charles Bronson (the actor) has the solution.