Donald Trump has asked the New York judge who presided over his recent hush-money trial to set aside his conviction as he seeks to capitalise on Monday’s supreme court ruling granting him broad immunity from prosecution.
In what is probably just the first real-world impact of the controversial ruling from the conservative-dominated court, which said Trump cannot be held criminally liable for many acts taken when he was president, Trump’s legal team sent a letter to the trial judge, Juan Merchan, asking him to postpone the sentencing hearing, which is scheduled for 11 July, while Merchan weighs how Monday’s court ruling affects the case.
Although the offences happened before Trump was president, the lawyers argue that the supreme court ruling confirms their argument that some evidence should be inadmissible because it related to presidential acts.
The president was convicted on 34 felony charges.
The office of Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan district attorney who prosecuted Trump’s hush-money case, said on Tuesday he would not oppose the move to delay his sentencing hearing.
“Although we believe [the] defendant’s arguments to be without merit, we do not oppose his request for leave to file and his putative request to adjourn sentencing pending determination of his motion,” the assistant district attorney Joshua Steinglass responded in a letter filed in response to the request.
The Trump team’s lightning-fast request, which was filed only a few hours after the supreme court decision, indicates it is likely the beginning of the fallout from a ruling that is being celebrated by Trump supporters but that critics warned paves the way to a vastly inflated definition of presidential powers, one which could lead to a future US dictatorship – perhaps even under Trump himself.
A Manhattan jury found Trump guilty on 31 May after a trial lasting several weeks on charges of falsifying documents to cover up hush money paid to a porn star, Stormy Daniels, shortly before the 2016 presidential election, which he won.
Trump had sought immunity from prosecution in prior court filings for conduct alleged to have involved official acts while he was president. While the lawyers did not raise this as a defence in the hush-money case, they argued that some evidence – including tweets about his former lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen, who testified against him in the trial – should have been ruled out because he was president at the time and therefore should have had immunity.
Trump reacted triumphantly to Monday’s high court ruling, writing on his Truth Social site: “Big win for our constitution and democracy. Proud to be an American!”
Joe Biden and senior Democrats condemned the decision, which complicates Trump’s prosecution on unrelated charges that he tried to overturn the 2020 presidential result and incited a mob to attack the US Capitol. The ruling stemmed from the former president’s claim that he had immunity from those charges, which are being pressed by a special prosecutor, Jack Smith, who accuses Trump of trying to defraud the United States by seeking to stay in office following Biden’s victory.
It means, in the first instance, that Trump’s trial is unlikely to take place before November’s presidential election. Should he win, he could order the justice department to drop the case.
Biden, speaking from the White House, said the ruling set a “dangerous precedent” and warned that it would embolden Trump if he is elected president again, freeing him to act without constraint.
