Trump lawyers press judge to overturn hush money conviction after Supreme Court immunity ruling
NEW YORK — Donald Trump’s lawyers are asking a New York judge to overturn his sentence conviction for hush money and dismiss the case, arguing that his historic trial was “tainted” with evidence that should not have been admitted because of the Recent Supreme Court Ruling on Presidential Immunity.
The former president’s lawyers laid out their case to overturn the guilty verdict in court documents made public Thursday, criticizing Manhattan prosecutors for rushing Trump to trial while the high court was still considering his immunity claims. Trump was convicted in May of falsifying documents to cover up a potential sex scandal. He is the first former president to be convicted of a crime.
Trump’s attorneys Todd Blanche and Emil Bove urged Judge Juan M. Merchan to vacate the jury’s verdict and dismiss the charges, which would prevent prosecutors from retrying the case. Merchan has said he will rule on the defense’s motions on Sept. 6 and sentence Trump on Sept. 18, “if that is still necessary.” Prosecutors have until July 24 to respond to the defense’s arguments.
“Rather than wait for the Supreme Court’s guidance, the plaintiffs arrogantly laughed at President Trump’s immunity motions and pushed to move quickly to trial,” Blanche and Bove wrote. Addressing Merchan directly, they said, “Your Honor now has the authority to address these injustices, and the court is obligated to do so in light of the Supreme Court’s decision.”
The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office declined to comment.
The Supreme Court released its immunity decision on July 1, granting presidents broad protections and immunity from prosecution for official acts. It also restricted prosecutors from citing official acts as evidence in an attempt to prove that a president’s unofficial actions violated the law.
Hours later, Trump’s lawyers wrote a letter to Merchan asking him to set aside the verdict and delay Trump’s sentencing, which was scheduled for Thursday. The Supreme Court did not define what constitutes an official act, leaving that to lower courts.
Trump’s trial began on April 15. The Supreme Court did not hear arguments on his immunity claims until April 25.
Trump was convicted on May 30 of 34 felonies, including falsifying business records in an effort prosecutors say was made to cover up a $130,000 hush-money payment to porn star Stormy Daniels just before the 2016 presidential election.
Daniels alleges she had a sexual encounter with Trump in 2006. Trump has repeatedly denied the claim, saying during his June 27 debate with President Joe Biden, “I did not have sex with a porn star.” He has vowed to appeal the conviction, but he cannot do so until he is sentenced.
Prosecutors say the payment to Daniels was part of a broader scheme to buy the silence of people who came forward during the campaign with potentially embarrassing stories alleging that Trump had had extramarital sex.
Trump’s former lawyer Michael Cohen paid Daniels and was later reimbursed by Trump. Prosecutors said Cohen — with Trump’s knowledge — concealed the payments by submitting monthly invoices for retainer payments as Trump’s personal attorney. Trump’s firm recorded the payments to Cohen as legal fees.
Trump was convicted after a seven-week trial, in which 22 witnesses, including Cohen and Daniels, testified. Trump refused to testify on his own behalf.
Trump denied any wrongdoing and said all the stories were false.
Trump’s lawyers argue that jurors should not have been allowed to hear about certain things, including his conversations with then-White House communications director Hope Hicks, testimony from another aide about how Trump received personal mail in the Oval Office and tweets he sent while he was president. Some of the checks and invoices at issue in the case also date back to his time as president.
Blanche and Bove also cited alleged conversations about the president’s power to pardon. Cohen, who pleaded guilty to federal charges related to the hush-money payment and unrelated crimes as part of an investigation into possible ties between Russia and the 2016 Trump campaign, told jurors he saw Trump on television talking “about, potentially, pardoning everybody in advance” and instructed his lawyers to explore the possibility.
The defense also complained about some testimony it characterized as digressing into “national security matters” — a general description by a Trump aide that various White House documents were sometimes taken onto Air Force One and Marine One and a mention that some calls to the White House were routed to secure lines in the Situation Room.
Trump’s lawyers wrote that prosecutors attempted to “assign a criminal motive” to some of Trump’s actions while in office — arguing, for example, that some of his 2018 tweets were part of a “pressure campaign” to prevent Cohen from turning against him.
The Supreme Court’s decision “closes the investigation into those motives,” the defense argued.
Jurors were shown tweets from 2018 in which the then-president initially warmly portrayed Cohen as someone who wouldn’t “flip out” but later as someone who made up stories to save himself. The change in tone came after Cohen pleaded guilty to campaign finance violations and said Trump ordered the hush-money payments, and prosecutors have portrayed the tweets as an attempt to pressure Cohen to remain loyal and then punish him if he didn’t.
In Thursday’s filing, Trump’s lawyers argued that the tweets were “communications with the American people regarding matters of public importance affecting President Trump’s credibility as commander in chief.”
The question of what jurors should be allowed to hear about a president’s behavior divided even the conservative members of the Supreme Court responsible for the majority opinion.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote in a separate concurrence that the Constitution does not require juries to be blind “to the circumstances surrounding conduct for which presidents may be held liable” and suggested that it would unnecessarily “hamper” a prosecutor’s case to exclude from the trial “any mention of the official act” at issue.
Trump’s lawyers had already invoked presidential immunity last year in a failed attempt to move the hush-money case from state court to federal court.
U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein dismissed Trump’s claim that the allegations in the hush-money indictment related to official duties, writing in July 2023: “The evidence overwhelmingly suggests that the matter was purely a personal matter for the President — a cover-up of an embarrassing event.”
“Hush money paid to an adult film star has nothing to do with the official actions of a president. It in no way reflects the color of the president’s official duties,” Hellerstein added.
Trump’s lawyers later attempted to delay the hush-money trial until the Supreme Court ruled on his immunity claim. Merchan denied the request, declaring it premature because it came well after the deadline for pretrial motions.
Trump’s lawyers never raised presidential immunity as a defense in the hush-money trial, but they tried unsuccessfully to prevent prosecutors from presenting evidence from Trump’s time in office to the jury.
The ongoing immunity fight and resulting sentencing delay have spared Trump the damage of possible jail time, probation, fines or other penalties just days before Republicans are set to formally nominate him as their presidential candidate at next week’s party convention in Milwaukee.
The delay prevents Trump from facing a split-screen trial as Democrats continue to debate President Joe Biden’s viability as a re-election candidate after his disappointing debate performance last month.
Falsifying corporate records carries a maximum penalty of four years in prison. Other possible penalties include probation, a fine or a conditional discharge, with Trump required to stay out of trouble to avoid additional punishment.
If Trump is sentenced to prison, he would be free to walk while he appeals. Because it is a state case with state-level charges tried in state court, Trump would not be able to pardon himself if he were re-elected. Presidential pardons only apply to federal crimes.
__
Associated Press reporter Eric Tucker in Washington contributed to this report.