Trump’s hush money case: Judge delays ruling after election victory

The judge overseeing Donald Trump's criminal hush money case has put off ruling on whether the president-elect's conviction should be thrown out on immunity grounds, enabling prosecutors to weigh next steps following his November 5 election victory.

0

The judge overseeing Donald Trump’s criminal hush money case has put off ruling on whether the president-elect’s conviction should be thrown out on immunity grounds, enabling prosecutors to weigh next steps following his November 5 election victory.

Reuters reports that Justice Juan Merchan was scheduled to rule on Tuesday regarding Trump’s argument that the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in July, which stated that presidents are immune from prosecution for their official acts, meant that the New York state case should be dismissed.

Instead, Merchan granted a request by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office to have until November 19 to consider how to approach the case in light of Trump’s looming inauguration in January 2025, email correspondence made public on Tuesday showed.

Trump’s scheduled November 26 sentencing is now widely expected to be postponed.

Trump in May became the first U.S. president, former or sitting, convicted of a crime when a jury in Manhattan found him guilty on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to cover up a potential sex scandal shortly before his first election win in 2016. Trump, who pleaded not guilty, has vowed to appeal the verdict after sentencing.

Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo wrote there were “competing interests” between ensuring a criminal case proceeds as usual and protecting the office of the president.

“The People agree that these are unprecedented circumstances,” Colangelo wrote.

Trump is set to be the first felon inaugurated as president after his victory over Vice President Kamala Harris.

At issue in the six-week Manhattan trial was a $130,000 payment made by Trump’s then-lawyer Michael Cohen to adult film actress Stormy Daniels to keep quiet about a sexual encounter she said she had with him in 2006 but which he has denied.

Trump’s defence lawyer Emil Bove wrote that the case ultimately needed to be dismissed to avoid interfering with Trump’s presidential duties.

“The stay, and dismissal, are necessary to avoid unconstitutional impediments to President Trump’s ability to govern,” Bove wrote.