U.S. President Donald Trump addressing his supporters at the Save America Rally on the Ellipse near the White House in Washington on January 6, 2021. (Photo by Yuri Gripas/Abaca/Sipa USA)
Donald Trump is urging the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene and put a stop to the sentencing hearing in his criminal hush-money case in New York. He argues that a president-elect should have the same prosecutorial immunity as a sitting president.
In a 51-page application filed on Wednesday morning, attorney D. John Sauer, representing Trump, argued that the judge overseeing the hush-money trial made an error by not overturning the 34 felony convictions and dismissing the case after Trump’s victory in the 2024 presidential election. Sauer claimed that the immunity granted to a sitting president, as established by a significant Supreme Court ruling last year, should also apply during the transition period following an election.
According to the filing, President Trump stated that once he takes office as the 47th President of the United States on January 20, 2025, he will enjoy complete immunity from any criminal proceedings, whether at the state or federal level. He further asserted that the doctrine of sitting-President immunity protects him from facing any criminal process during the short but crucial period of Presidential transition, as he focuses on the challenging task of preparing to assume the Executive power of the United States.
On Wednesday, the filing was made, which follows a decision by an appellate court judge in New York to deny Trump’s request for an indefinite delay of the proceedings.
Trump once again took the chance to criticize Acting New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan, the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office, and his former fixer Michael Cohen. He asserted that the entire case against him was nothing but political theater.
According to the filing, the interlocutory appeal initiated by President Trump on the grounds of Presidential immunity triggers an automatic stay of proceedings in the trial court, as established in the case law of Trump v. United States and related cases. The filing asserts that this appeal will ultimately lead to the dismissal of the politically motivated prosecution by the District Attorney. From the very beginning, this prosecution has been flawed, revolving around the wrongful actions and false claims made by a disgraced, disbarred attorney who is known for being a serial liar. Furthermore, it is argued that the prosecution violated President Trump’s due process rights and lacked any merit.
Sauer further argued that the sentencing hearing on Friday should be put on hold until the outcome of his appeal is determined.
The filing states that the New York trial court does not have the authority to impose sentence and judgment on President Trump or continue any criminal proceedings against him. This is because his underlying appeal raises significant claims of Presidential immunity, which need to be resolved before any further action can be taken. The filing also suggests that review in this Court may be necessary to address these claims.
During the oral arguments, New York First Department Court of Appeals Associate Justice Ellen Gesmer remained unconvinced by the same assertions, as previously reported by Law&Crime.
“Mr. Blanche, can you provide any evidence to support the idea that presidential immunity also applies to presidents-elect?” Gesmer inquired from Trump’s attorney, Todd Blanche.
Blanche, who Trump has already appointed as his deputy attorney general, reportedly responded, “No, there has never been a case like this before.”
According to reports, Steven Wu from the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office highlighted this point.
“The assertion lacks any evidence to warrant an automatic stay,” Wu argued. “Defense counsel has failed to provide any legal precedent supporting the notion that a president-elect enjoys the same immunity as a sitting president.”
Gesmer also dismissed the arguments regarding the timing of the sentencing, stating to Blanche that Merchan had repeatedly postponed the hearing at Trump’s request.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who is responsible for reviewing applications in the Second Circuit, has issued an order for the district attorney’s office to provide a response to Trump’s petition by 10 a.m. on Thursday.
Friday’s sentencing hearing is looming for Trump, and it seems that Merchan is inclined to go easy on the president-elect. Merchan has indicated that he is likely to spare Trump from any significant legal repercussions and will permit him to participate remotely, citing the demands of the presidential transition period.
In a recent statement, Judge Merchan expressed a preliminary inclination to refrain from imposing a prison sentence in the case. While the court must allow the parties and the defendant to present their arguments before making a final determination, it is worth noting that the judge is leaning towards a non-incarceration sentence. The prosecution has also acknowledged that they no longer consider a prison term to be a viable recommendation.
