“Can’t the judge in the New York case simply convict Trump and let him sit — and then bring him back to the courtroom once Trump is no longer in office?”
—Pepper Parr, Carlisle, Ontario
Hello Pepper,
The short answer is: maybe. It’s a question Judge Juan Merchan may have to answer in the coming weeks. Manhattan prosecutors even mentioned this possibility in a recent letter to the judge. They wrote: “Given the need to balance competing constitutional interests, consideration should be given to various non-dismissal options that could address the concerns raised by the pending post-trial criminal proceedings during the presidency, such as the postponement of all remaining criminals. proceeding until after the end of the defendant’s upcoming presidential term.”
Before we get to that possibility, Merchan must rule on Trump’s proposals to dismiss the case and overturn his guilty verdicts. The soonest that could happen is next month, after the prosecutor responds to Trump’s impending dismissal request on December 9. If the judge sides with Trump in both motions, there will be no conviction.
But to your question could The judge has suspended the case, we are in uncharted territory. The prosecutor’s letter to the judge shows that it is a possibility they are prepared to defend. Trump has tried to delay his sentencing, but we will have to wait and see what his position on this issue would be if his pre-sentencing motions are denied. His lawyers have indicated they would immediately appeal any adverse decision on his pending motions — even to the Supreme Court if necessary — so it’s unclear if or when we’ll get to the point of sentencing before Trump takes office.
That is, it is possible that all of these issues will not be resolved before Inauguration Day on January 20. And it is unlikely that criminal proceedings against a sitting president will continue in any case. If prosecutors and Merchan try to pursue the remaining proceedings after Trump leaves office, one might think he would try to halt or quash them, although it is unclear on what grounds he would do so. Ultimately, the answer to the question is whether there is a judge of first instance can doing anything – especially anything atypical – is answered by the courts of appeal. As always, all roads lead back to the Supreme Court, where in 2029 we may wonder what the justices will do.
Subscribe to the Deadline: Legal newsletter for expert analysis of the week’s top legal stories, including Supreme Court updates and developments in Donald Trump’s lawsuits.
This article was originally published on MSNBC.com
