Judge to decide on Trump’s hush money case

A week after Donald Trump’s resounding election victory, a Manhattan judge, Juan M. Merchan, is expected to issue a critical ruling on Trump’s request to dismiss his hush money conviction.

Judge Juan M. Merchan has said he will issue a written opinion Tuesday on Trump’s request to toss his conviction and either order a new trial or dismiss the indictment entirely.

Merchan had been expected to rule in September, but put it off “to avoid any appearance” he was trying to sway the election. His decision could be on ice again if Trump takes other steps to delay or end the case.

If the judge upholds the verdict, the case would be on track for sentencing Nov. 26 — though that could shift or vanish depending on appeals or other legal maneuvers.

The conviction stems from Trump’s involvement in efforts to conceal a $130,000 payment made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels during the 2016 presidential campaign. Daniels alleged an affair with Trump, and the payment was allegedly made to prevent her from going public with her claims.

Trump’s former lawyer, Michael Cohen, made the payment, which Trump later reimbursed him for, with the transaction being falsely recorded in business records.

Trump was convicted on 34 counts of falsifying business records earlier this year, but he has maintained his innocence, calling the verdict part of a politically motivated “witch hunt” designed to harm his presidential campaign. His legal team has been fighting for months to have the conviction overturned.

Trump’s defense team is pushing to have the conviction dismissed, citing a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in July that granted former presidents broad immunity from criminal prosecution for actions taken while in office. The ruling states that presidents are immune from prosecution for acts carried out as part of their official duties.

Trump’s lawyers argue that the case should not have considered any actions related to his presidency, particularly conversations he had in the Oval Office about reimbursing Cohen.

However, Manhattan prosecutors contend that the payments were purely personal, not related to Trump’s duties as president. They argue that the Supreme Court’s ruling does not apply to this case because the alleged criminal actions occurred before Trump was elected president and did not fall under the scope of his official duties.

Judge Merchan had initially planned to rule on Trump’s request in September but delayed the decision to avoid influencing the election. Now that the election is over, his ruling could either uphold the conviction or set the stage for further legal challenges.

If the conviction stands, Trump would face sentencing on November 26, with possible penalties ranging from a fine or probation to as much as four years in prison. However, given Trump’s political status, a prison sentence seems unlikely, though the case could be delayed by appeals.

Trump’s legal team has also sought to move the case from state court to federal court, where they believe they have a better chance of asserting presidential immunity. This request was denied by a federal judge in September, and Trump’s lawyers are currently appealing that decision. Should the case be transferred, it could affect how the legal arguments are presented and the types of evidence that can be used.

The legal battle over the hush money payments is just one of many ongoing cases for the former president.

In addition to this case, Trump faces federal charges related to the mishandling of classified documents, as well as investigations into his involvement in the January 6th Capitol attack. However, his supporters remain steadfast, with some even turning the conviction into a political statement by wearing “I’m Voting for the Felon” apparel as a defiant show of support.

If the judge upholds the verdict, Trump’s legal team will likely continue to challenge the case, potentially pushing for a new trial or further appeals.

Legal experts suggest that the definition of what constitutes an “official act” of the president will be a key issue in determining the outcome. If the judge grants a new trial, it could delay the case well into next year.

Source AP News