A New York judge has postponed a ruling on whether President-elect Donald Trump’s conviction in his criminal trial would hold up under the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity precedent following his recent election victory, according to a report from The Hill.
Judge Juan Merchan was expected to rule on Tuesday whether Trump’s conviction should be vacated in light of the Supreme Court’s recent decision on presidential immunity issued after Trump’s trial. Trump's sentencing was originally scheduled for July 11, mere days before he was set to accept the Republican Party's nomination for president.
Trump was convicted earlier this year in a rigged trial brought about by a partisan prosecutor over a minor bookkeeping offense, with a partisan judge and a jury loaded with anti-Trump Democrats hell-bent on trying to stop his return to the White House.
Recommended: Trump Makes a Surprising Choice for His Homeland Security Secretary
Merchan, who had previously postponed rulings in the case until after the election, agreed to postpone it again until Nov. 19, giving prosecutors time to respond to Trump’s request for a full dismissal now that he’s set to enter the White House. Court records, now public, confirm the decision to freeze proceedings temporarily.
Trump’s sentencing, which would be the first of any former president, is scheduled for Nov. 26. He was convicted on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in connection with a hush money payment made to porn actor Stormy Daniels ahead of the 2016 election to conceal an affair, which he denies.
Trump’s attorneys believe his election as president compels the dismissal of his criminal prosecutions.
“The stay, and dismissal, are necessary to avoid unconstitutional impediments to President Trump’s ability to govern,” Trump attorney Emil Bove wrote in an email to the judge.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s (D) office agreed to delay the proceedings as they assess how to respond to Trump’s demand.
“The People agree that these are unprecedented circumstances and that the arguments raised by defense counsel in correspondence to the People on Friday require careful consideration,” prosecutor Matthew Colangelo wrote to the judge.
The Supreme Court determined that former presidents have absolute immunity from criminal charges for actions tied to essential constitutional duties and likely immunity for other official conduct. While unofficial actions can still lead to prosecution, the court emphasized that juries cannot scrutinize a president’s motives in carrying out presidential duties.
For our VIPs: Trump Won, but Now He Must Succeed
Trump’s legal team argued that prosecutors presented jurors with evidence during the seven-week trial that should have been protected under this ruling—a claim the district attorney’s office disputes.
Democrats had hoped that Trump's conviction would undermine his reelection bid, but voters saw it for what it was: partisan lawfare. Experts on the left and right trashed the case as unjustified, saying the case only went as far as it did because the accused was Donald Trump.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member