Donald Trump’s legal team is pushing back against unconventional proposals by the district attorney’s office to uphold his hush money conviction.
At a Glance
- Trump’s lawyers urge dismissal of the hush money conviction.
- The DA’s office suggests treating the case as if Trump had died or freezing proceedings.
- The case challenges the boundaries of presidential immunity.
- Judge Juan M. Merchan’s decision could set a precedent.
Trump’s Legal Defense
Trump’s lawyers are advocating for the dismissal of his conviction on the basis that the district attorney’s proposal violates constitutional principles. The suggestion from the prosecution to treat Trump’s case as a posthumous one—akin to if he were deceased—is called “absurd” by Trump’s legal team. They argue that these options not only disregard his rights as a sitting president but also could impact the future exercise of presidential duties.
The DA’s office has put forward several options, including delaying the proceedings until Trump’s term ends, or even preserving the conviction without sentencing, acknowledging presidential immunity. This controversial strategy has been sharply criticized by Trump’s camp, which calls these maneuvers politically motivated and unconstitutional. They contend that the judgment should be overturned altogether.
BREAKING: President-elect Donald Trump’s lawyers formally ask a judge to throw out his hush money criminal conviction. https://t.co/L4UKGnX2AV
— The Associated Press (@AP) December 3, 2024
Prosecutorial Tactics
The Manhattan district attorney’s office’s approach mirrors cases where a criminal defendant dies before the end of an appeal process. Preserving Trump’s conviction without imposing jail time is one tactic under consideration, explicitly citing his presidential immunity as a reason not to interfere with his presidency. Prosecutors maintain that upholding the jury’s decision is paramount, despite the unique situation of a president in office.
“Weaponizing the judiciary for blatant, partisan gain diminishes the collective faith in our institutions and sows further division.” – Fetterman
Steven Cheung, a spokesperson for Trump, lambasts the case, calling it “pathetic” and asserting that it never should have been brought, citing constitutional demands for dismissal. The advocates for Trump insist that halting the legal process until post-term would merely shift potential punishments onto his successor, creating further political complications.
President-elect Donald Trump’s lawyers urge judge to toss his hush money conviction https://t.co/UT22zBJto2
— ActionNewsJax (@ActionNewsJax) December 3, 2024
The Role of Judicial Decision
Judge Juan M. Merchan presides over a case setting uncharted territory regarding presidential legal immunity. Trump’s conviction stems from allegations of falsifying business records to conceal payments to Stormy Daniels, claims he denies. The judgment from Judge Merchan could lead to multiple outcomes, from dismissing the case to pursuing strategies suggested by the prosecutors or awaiting a federal appeals court decision. The case intersects law and executive privilege, showcasing the legal system’s delicate balance of power.
“This lawless case should have never been brought, and the Constitution demands that it be immediately dismissed,” Cheung said in a statement.
As the proceedings take place amidst Trump’s return to office, the decision-making process remains intricate and politically charged. The impending legal decisions not only affect Trump’s future but also signal to a broader audience about the limits and protections inherent within the U.S. presidency.
Sources
1. Trump’s lawyers rebuff DA’s idea for upholding his hush money conviction, calling it ‘absurd’
2. DA suggests unusual idea for halting Trump’s hush money case while upholding his conviction
