NEW YORK — The legal team from Manhattan that successfully achieved a groundbreaking criminal conviction against former U.S. President Donald Trump have refuted his assertion that the judgement should be overturned following a U.S. Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity.
In a legal document submitted on July 24 and disclosed to the public on Thursday, the prosecutors argued that the Supreme Court’s decision had no relevance to their case, which originated from a clandestine payment made to an adult film actress.
“The evidence he is contesting is either entirely related to unofficial conduct, or, at the very least, official conduct for which any presumption of immunity has been effectively countered,” stated the prosecutors from the office of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.
Trump, the Republican candidate in the upcoming Nov. 5 election, was found guilty on May 30 on 34 felony charges of manipulating business records to conceal his former attorney Michael Cohen’s $130,000 payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels. This payment was made to ensure her silence prior to the 2016 election about an alleged intimate encounter with Trump.
Trump has consistently denied any involvement with Daniels and has pledged to challenge the guilty verdict. He holds the dubious distinction of being the first U.S. president, either in office or retired, to be convicted of a crime.
In a 6-3 decision on July 1, the Supreme Court ruled that presidents cannot be criminally charged for official acts, and that evidence of such acts cannot be used in a prosecution for private matters.
Legal pundits suggest that Justice Juan Merchan is unlikely to accede to Trump’s plea to dismiss the verdict, as the majority of the conduct in question occurred before Trump’s presidency from 2017-2021 and pertains to personal affairs, not official duties.
However, Merchan postponed Trump’s sentencing from July 11 to Sept. 18, less than two months prior to the election, to provide his legal team an opportunity to present their arguments.
A fortnight ago, Trump’s defense attorneys implored the judge to discard the jury’s guilty verdict, arguing that the prosecutors improperly relied on evidence of his official acts during the trial, which they claimed was inappropriate in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling.
Trump’s legal team objected to the introduction of evidence of Trump’s 2018 Twitter posts about Cohen, which prosecutors claimed demonstrated Trump’s knowledge of his former attorney’s payoff to Daniels. The defense attorneys argued that these posts were official communications.
In their Thursday submission, the prosecutors countered that Trump made the posts in his “unofficial capacity.”
Merchan has stated that he will rule on Trump’s arguments by Sept. 6. If the conviction is upheld, the case will move forward to sentencing. Once sentenced, Trump can formally appeal both the verdict and the sentencing to a higher state court.
Agree – Prosecutors are right to continue pursuing Trump’s hush money conviction, regardless of an immunity verdict. Justice must prevail.
Agree – Justice must be served, no one is above the law.
Disagree – Waste of time and resources to keep pursuing this case.