Trump denied Presidential immunity in hush money conviction case
New Delhi, Dec 17: A New York judge has ruled that former President Donald Trump cannot invoke presidential immunity to overturn his conviction in the hush money case, rejecting a key argument from Trump’s legal team, CNN reported.
Judge Juan Merchan’s 41-page decision on Monday addressed Trump’s May conviction on 34 counts of falsifying business records, stemming from payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels to silence allegations of an affair ahead of the 2016 presidential election.
Merchan determined that the Supreme Court’s broad interpretation of presidential immunity for official acts during Trump’s presidency does not extend to the charges in this case, which are tied to personal conduct as reported by the international media. “The evidence contested by the defence pertains entirely to unofficial conduct and is not protected by immunity,” the judge wrote. “Even if error occurred in the introduction of evidence, it was harmless given the overwhelming evidence of guilt,” as quoted by CNN.
Trump’s team argued that the conviction should be dismissed because prosecutors relied on evidence they claim relates to Trump’s official duties as president. This included testimony from White House aides such as Hope Hicks and Madeleine Westerhout. However, Merchan ruled that the actions in question, including efforts to cover up the hush money payments, were clearly unofficial.
“If falsifying records to conceal payments is undeniably an unofficial act, then related communications aimed at furthering that cover-up are also unofficial,” Merchan wrote, emphasising that the Supreme Court’s immunity decision does not shield Trump from the conviction.
CNN reported that Steven Cheung, a spokesman for Trump, criticised the ruling, calling it “a direct violation of the Supreme Court’s decision on immunity and longstanding jurisprudence.”
Trump’s attorneys are expected to appeal the decision, adding to the growing list of legal challenges surrounding the case that could delay final resolution for months or even years.
The former president’s legal team has also argued that Trump’s status as president creates a “legal impediment” to further criminal proceedings, and they have filed motions seeking dismissal on those grounds. Merchan has yet to rule on that argument.
Despite Trump’s conviction, sentencing remains on hold. Prosecutors and Trump’s defense team have agreed that no sentencing will occur while he is serving as president-elect. The Manhattan District Attorney’s office, however, has opposed dismissing the conviction, calling such a move an “extreme remedy.” They maintain that while sentencing could be delayed or modified, the jury’s verdict should stand.
Trump’s conviction is linked to a $130,000 payment made by his then-lawyer, Michael Cohen, to Daniels to prevent her from speaking publicly about an alleged affair with Trump. Trump has consistently denied the affair and any wrongdoing in the case.
