Advertisement

Judge delays ruling on scrapping Trump’s conviction

Donald Trump has argued the hush money case was a political tactic to harm his election campaign.

Donald Trump has argued the hush money case was a political tactic to harm his election campaign. Photo: Getty

A judge has postponed a decision on whether to undo Donald Trump’s conviction in his hush money case as his lawyers argue that his election as US president warrants dismissing the case altogether.

New York Judge Juan Merchan had been set to rule on Tuesday (local time) on their earlier request to throw out Trump’s conviction for a different reason – because of a US Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity.

Instead, he told Trump’s lawyers he would delay the ruling until November 19 so that prosecutors can give their view of what to do in light of Trump’s impending return to the White House.

According to emails filed in court on Tuesday, Trump’s lawyers and prosecutors had agreed in recent days to the one-week postponement.

Because of the “unprecedented circumstances”, prosecutors need to consider how to balance the “competing interests” of the jury’s verdict and the presidency, prosecutor Matthew Colangelo wrote.

Trump lawyer Emil Bove, meanwhile, argued the case should be thrown out so Trump can run the country.

“The stay, and dismissal, are necessary to avoid unconstitutional impediments to president Trump’s ability to govern,” he wrote in an email to Merchan.

Trump’s lawyers and prosecutors had no immediate comment on Tuesday.

A jury convicted Trump in May of falsifying business records related to a $US130,000 ($198,400) payment to porn actor Stormy Daniels in 2016.

The payout was to buy her silence about claims that she had sex with Trump.

He says they did not, denies any wrongdoing and maintains the prosecution was a political tactic meant to harm his latest campaign.

He is due to be sentenced on November 26.

Just over a month after the verdict, the Supreme Court ruled that ex-presidents cannot be prosecuted for actions they take in the course of running the US, and prosecutors cannot cite those actions even to bolster a case centred on purely personal conduct.

Trump’s lawyers cited that ruling to argue that the hush money jury got some evidence it should not have, such as Trump’s presidential financial disclosure form and testimony from some White House aides.

Prosecutors disagreed and said the evidence in question was only “a sliver” of their case.

Trump’s criminal conviction was a first for any former US president. It left the 78-year-old facing the possibility of punishment ranging from a fine or probation to up to four years in prison.

The case centred on how Trump accounted for reimbursing his personal lawyer for the Daniels payment.

The lawyer, Michael Cohen, fronted the money. He later recouped it through payments that Trump’s company logged as legal expenses.

Trump, by then in the White House, signed most of the cheques himself.

Prosecutors said the designation was meant to cloak the true purpose of the payments and help cover up a broader effort to keep 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 neither elected nor sworn in – when Cohen paid Daniels in October 2016.

He was president when Cohen was reimbursed, and Cohen testified that they discussed the repayment arrangement in the Oval Office.

Trump has fought for months to overturn the verdict and could now seek to leverage his status as president-elect.

Although he was tried as a private citizen, his return to the White House in January could propel a court to step in and avoid the unprecedented spectacle of sentencing a former and future president.

While urging Merchan to nix the conviction, Trump also has been trying to move the case to federal court.

Before the election, a federal judge repeatedly said no to the move but Trump has appealed.

-with AAP

Advertisement
Stay informed, daily
A FREE subscription to The New Daily arrives every morning and evening.
The New Daily is a trusted source of national news and information and is provided free for all Australians. Read our editorial charter.
Copyright © 2024 The New Daily.
All rights reserved.