A judge in New York has put off a decision about whether Donald’s Trump’s “hush money” convictions should be thrown out as legal teams consider the impact of his election win.
As the first convicted felon to win a presidential election, Trump is trying to tie up some of his legal loose ends before his victory is certified in January next year.
In court documents unsealed overnight, it has been revealed his legal team moved in recent days to renew his bid to have his 34 felony convictions in the New York hush money case dismissed.
“The stay, and dismissal, are necessary to avoid unconstitutional impediments to president Trump’s ability to govern,” Trump’s lawyer Emil Bove wrote.
“There are strong reasons for the requested stay, and eventual dismissal of the case in the interests of justice.”
Trump was due to be sentenced on November 26 and Tuesday had been set down as a deadline for the judge to consider how a separate presidential immunity ruling impacted the case.
Mr Bove, together with the prosecution, asked for more time.
Judge Juan Merchan has pushed that deadline to November 19, in a move that has been seen as a win for Trump.
Trump was found guilty of falsifying business records to cover up hush money paid to porn star Stormy Daniels on the eve of the 2016 election, to silence her claims of a sexual encounter with him and protect his campaign.
Trump still denies the encounter took place.
Stormy Daniels testified as a witness in the Manhattan criminal trial. (AP: Elizabeth Williams)
Trump’s legal team has argued that much of the evidence used in the trial should be thrown out since the Supreme Court ruled presidential acts were immune from prosecution.
In emails between the defence counsel, the public prosecutor and the judge, it is apparent that on Friday, just three days after the election, Trump’s lawyers made a new request.
In an email to Judge Merchan, prosecutor Matthew Colangelo said Trump’s team had asked for a stay of proceedings to provide time to consider how the results of the presidential election would impact the case and that he agreed with the suggestion.
“The people agree that these are unprecedented circumstances,” the emails read.
“Arguments raised by defence counsel … require careful consideration to ensure that any further steps in this proceeding appropriately balance the competing interests of a jury verdict of guilt following trial … and the office of the president.”
The November 26 sentencing hearing is now widely expected to be postponed too.
Trump’s other criminal cases
Trump, 78, is hoping to enter office unencumbered by any of the four criminal cases he has faced and which once were thought to have threatened to derail his 2024 candidacy to return to the White House.
Trump has portrayed the hush money case brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, a Democrat, and the three other state and federal criminal indictments brought in 2023 as politically motivated attempts to harm his presidential campaign.
He pleaded not guilty in all four cases.
“It is now abundantly clear that Americans want an immediate end to the weaponisation of our justice system,” Trump campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung said in a statement on Tuesday.
Special Counsel Jack Smith brought two of the cases against Trump — one involving classified documents he kept after leaving office and the other involving his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss.
A Florida-based federal judge in July dismissed the documents case. The Justice Department is now evaluating how to wind down Smith’s election-related case.
Trump also faces state criminal charges in Georgia over his bid to reverse his 2020 loss in that state, but the case remains in limbo.
In July, the Supreme Court, in a decision arising from one of Smith’s two cases against Trump, decided that presidents are immune from prosecution involving their official acts and that juries cannot be presented evidence of official acts in trials over personal conduct.
It marked the first time that the court recognised any degree of presidential immunity from prosecution.
In making the case for immunity, Trump’s lawyers said the jury that convicted Trump in the hush money case was shown evidence by prosecutors of his social media posts as president and heard testimony from his former aides about conversations that occurred in the White House during his term.
Mr Bragg’s office countered that the Supreme Court’s ruling has no bearing on the case, which they said concerned “wholly unofficial conduct”.
The Supreme Court in its ruling found no immunity for a president’s unofficial acts.
ABC/Reuters