Judge set to rule on whether to scrap Trump’s conviction in hush money case
NEW YORK– A judge will make a ruling on Tuesday whether you want to undo it The conviction of newly elected President Donald Trump in his hush money case due to a ruling by the US Supreme Court on presidential immunity.
New York Judge Juan M. Merchan, who presided over Trump’s historic trial, is now tasked with deciding whether to reject the jury’s verdict and order a new trial — or even dismiss the charges altogether. The judge’s ruling could also determine whether the former and now future commander-in-chief will be sentenced as scheduled on November 26.
The Republican regain the White House a week ago, but the legal issue concerns his status as a former president, not an impending one.
A jury condemned Trump in May of falsifying business records related to a $130,000 payment to porn actor Stormy Daniels in 2016. The payoff was intended to buy her silence on claims that she had sex with Trump.
He says this is not the case, denies any wrongdoing and insists the prosecution was a political tactic designed to damage his latest campaign.
Just over a month after the ruling, the… The Supreme Court ruled that ex-presidents cannot be prosecuted for actions they took while governing the country, and that prosecutors cannot even cite these actions to support a case based purely on personal conduct.
Trump’s lawyers cited the ruling claim that the hush money jury was given some evidence it shouldn’t have, such as Trump’s presidential financial disclosure form and the testimony of some White House aides.
Prosecutors disagreed and said the evidence in question was only “a piece” of their case.
Trump’s criminal conviction was a first for any ex-president. The 78-year-old faced the possibility of a sentence ranging from a fine or probation to up to four years in prison.
The case focused on Trump’s accountability for reimbursing his personal attorney for the Daniels payment.
The lawyer, Michael Cohen, controlled the money. He later recouped it through a series of payments that Trump’s company recorded as legal fees. Trump, who was in the White House at the time, signed most of the checks himself.
Prosecutors said the designation was intended to obscure the true purpose of the payments and obscure a broader effort to prevent voters from hearing unflattering claims about the Republican during his first campaign.
Trump said Cohen was legitimately paid for legal services, and that Daniels’ story was suppressed to avoid embarrassing Trump’s family, not to influence the electorate.
Trump was a private citizen — campaigning for president but not elected or sworn in — when Cohen paid Daniels in October 2016. He was president when Cohen was repaid, and Cohen testified that they discussed the repayment arrangement in the Oval Office.
Trump has been fighting for months to overturn the verdict and could now try to leverage his status as president-elect. Although he was tried as a private citizen, his impending return to the White House could prompt a court to intervene and avoid the unprecedented spectacle of convicting a former and future president.
While urging Merchan to overturn the conviction, Trump has also sought to take the case to federal court. Before the election, a federal judge repeatedly said no for the move, but Trump has filed an appeal.