Donald Trump’s lawyers asked the judge overseeing his hush-money criminal case in Manhattan for permission to attempt another dismissal, arguing that throwing out the case was necessary “to ensure the orderly transition of executive power.” facilitate” after his victory over Kamala Harris.
Todd Blanche, Trump’s lead attorney and pick for U.S. deputy attorney general, and Emil Bove, his pick for deputy U.S. attorney general, railed against Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg their letter to Judge Juan Merchan, which was made public on Wednesday. .
Bragg’s office, they complained, “does not appear ready to dismiss this politically motivated and fatally flawed case, which is required by law and will happen as justice takes its course.”
They noted that the Department of Justice (DoJ) is poised to hear federal cases against Trump, given the DOJ’s policy prohibiting the prosecution of sitting presidents.
“As in those cases, dismissal is necessary here,” their filing argued. “Just as a sitting president is completely immune from any criminal trial, so too is President Trump as president-elect.”
They said pursuing this case “would be uniquely destabilizing” and “could hamper the functioning of the entire government apparatus, both in foreign and domestic affairs.”
The lawyers asked for a December 20 deadline to submit their pitch on why Trump’s election deserves the dismissal of this case.
Trump was found guilty on May 30 of 34 felonies for falsifying corporate records in an illegal scheme to influence the 2016 election. Prosecutors said Trump improperly recorded reimbursements to his then-attorney Michael Cohen, who paid adult film star Stormy Daniels $130,000 for her silence about an alleged affair with Trump, as “legal fees.”
The jurors who presided over Trump’s case reached their verdict in less than 12 hours. The watershed proceedings marked not only the first time a president – former or sitting – faced a criminal trial, but also a conviction.
The letter became public after prosecutors told the court on Tuesday that they planned to fight expected pressure from Trump for his resignation after his victory. The prosecutors’ letter laid out the arguments they expected Trump to make in his attempted removal from office after the victory.
Bragg’s office argued that Merchan should plan a timeline for Trump’s expected rejection, which prosecutors said they “intend to oppose.” They also said other proceedings in the case should be postponed until the dismissal issue is resolved.
These developments suggest that Trump’s scheduled Nov. 26 sentencing in his hush-money case in Manhattan has almost certainly been postponed, given the litany of issues to be litigated.
Prosecutors said in their letter that they had recently considered Trump’s arguments for removal, which, they noted, included the assertion that he had “legal immunity from criminal prosecution based on his current status as President-elect.” . They also pointed to his efforts to take the case to federal court — which came to nothing.
Trump, prosecutors had noted, claimed his case should be dismissed just because the appeals could not be completed before the inauguration. Prosecutors noted that Trump’s lawyers had also previously expressed the belief that he would be “completely immune from indictment or any criminal proceedings.”
Prosecutors said they respected the presidency and recognized the logistical limitations. But they wrote: “No current law provides that a president’s temporary immunity from prosecution requires the resignation of a president post-process a criminal proceeding that was initiated at a time when the suspect was not immune from criminal prosecution, and which is based on unofficial conduct from which the suspect is also not immune.”
They have argued that courts must balance different constitutional interests to protect both the independence of the executive branch and the integrity of the legal system.
Prosecutors also said in their letter to Merchan that options other than dismissal should be weighed, including “delaying all remaining criminal proceedings until after the end of Defendant’s upcoming presidential term.”
In addition to the post-election issues that were about to be litigated, Merchan would decide Trump’s pre-election immunity bid. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on July 1 that sitting presidents enjoy broad immunity for official acts committed while in office, saying the decision undermined the conviction.
Both prosecutors and defense attorneys asked Merchan last week to suspend the proceedings due to new circumstances resulting from the election. The Public Prosecution Service had asked for a week to indicate how they thought this case should proceed, which resulted in Tuesday’s letter.
Trump’s victory has sent other criminal cases against him into a tailspin. The Justice Department is wrapping up its two federal cases against Trump, and the state-level election interference case in Georgia appears to be in limbo.
