Technically speaking, a state is a separate sovereign government. This is what means to have a "federal" system. So New York can indict Trump, just like Canada or the International Court can.

What effect if any, a state indictment has, would be decided by federal courts.

submit to discovery questioning. I don't see any particular prohibition against such a thing anywhere.

So many unanswered questions. I think it's worth a try.

A state can indict, but they might not be able to try. However, just issuing the indictment could cause severe damage.

be indicted at the state level.

the next interesting constitutional question then is whether or not a state criminal trial could proceed while the president is in office. right-wingers have already made the arguments about time and constitutional duties, which i think the jones v. clinton case decision largely dismisses. granted, the demands of defending a criminal case is different than for a civil case, but still, many of the same arguments apply.

In 1789, the Presidency was not a 24/7 job like it is today, and trials were much shorter and simpler. So the only real question is whether Congress alone has power over the President, or does the judiciary also have power? Since the question will decided by judges themselves, I suspect they will say the yes.

to hold that holding the office of presidency confers immunity from prosecution for a state-level crime (which may include such things as murder) for as long as you retain that office.

it's a ridiculous result. even theoretically, how is congress to know? surely one could imagine a situation where congress would want to know the result of the state-level trial before deciding whether or not to remove a president.

Here is a scenario that would require the SCOTUS to allow an indfictment:



A sitting President is charged with a crime, financial or otherwise, in which a normal citizen would be prosecuted.

The President refuses to acknowledge or respond, claiming the sitting president argument.

The President cancels both the 2018 an2020 elections and Congress allows it and refuses to impeach.

Far fetched? Maybe. But at this point I think the SCOTUS would allow an indictment.

No President can cancel elections. Impossible.

There's no easy out for Trump. He is screwed.

I don't see an awful lot of love from the joint chiefs.

Federal Marshall work for the disparaged Justice Department.

It would be Trump and Eric Prince against the world.

If he cancels elections, he can order the FBI, backed by the military to seize the ballot boxes. He can bribe 34 Senators to agree to it. He can then pardon everyone who followed the illegal orders

Any State can file charges against any person residing within its jurisdiction. There is no requirement that warrants be served or the indictment even unsealed until the State is ready. In theory, NY State could announce that it intends to file charges for X, Y & Z against Donald J. Trump and essentially put Congress on notice that it can either impeach him now and let them indict or they can spend the next 2.5 years justifying having a President under indictment. I would not be surprised if this is what it comes to if the house GOP wont act as this keeps unfolding into sworn statements in charging dicuments that Trump committed crimes.