A New York appeals judge has denied President-elect Donald Trump’s request to delay the Jan. 10 sentencing in his criminal hush money case.
Trump’s sentencing will proceed as planned on Friday, pending potential additional legal maneuvers by the president-elect’s lawyers.
Judge Ellen Gesmer rejected Trump’s claim that the case should be delayed because of presidential immunity, after his attorney argued before the court that Trump is covered by presidential immunity that extends to him while he waits to be sworn in.
The appellate court heard arguments Tuesday in Trump’s lawsuit against the judge in the case, Juan Merchan, and Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, as part of Trump’s effort to halt his sentencing following his criminal conviction in May.
“We should get a stay so that no further action happens,” defense attorney Todd Blanche said during oral arguments at the Appellate Division’s First Judicial Department. “The imposition is extraordinary.”
Prosecutors said there is no evidence “whatsoever” to back the claim that presidential immunity applies to Trump prior to his inauguration on Jan. 20.
“The claim is so baseless that there is no support for an automatic stay here,” said Steven Wu of the Manhattan district attorney’s office. “There is a compelling public interest in seeing this process come to an end.”
The prosecutor noted that Trump’s sentencing was originally scheduled for July 11 and every delay since has been done at Trump’s request.
“If sentencing is to happen at all, now is the best time for it to happen,” Wu said.
Trump was found guilty in May on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records related to a hush money payment made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels in order to boost his electoral prospects in the 2016 presidential election.
Merchan initially scheduled Trump’s sentencing for July 11 before pushing it back in order to weigh if Trump’s conviction was impacted by the Supreme Court’s July ruling prohibiting the prosecution of a president for official acts undertaken while in office. Merchan subsequently ruled that Trump’s conviction related “entirely to unofficial conduct” and “poses no danger of intrusion on the authority and function of the Executive Branch.”
Trump’s lawyers asked the appeals court to stop the proceedings — including his Jan. 10 sentencing — and to dismiss his conviction outright based on presidential immunity grounds.
“Justice Merchan’s erroneous decisions threaten the institution of the Presidency and run squarely against established precedent disallowing any criminal process against a President-Elect, as well as prohibiting the use of evidence of a President’s official acts against him in a criminal proceeding,” they argued in their suit.
Blanche and fellow defense lawyer Emil Bove, both of whom Trump has picked for top Justice Department posts in his incoming administration, claimed in the suit that Trump’s “undisputed absolute immunity” extends to his time as president-elect — an argument that Judge Merchan roundly denied last week.
The lawyers also claimed that the jury’s verdict was “erroneous” because they saw evidence related to official acts.
“President Trump brings this Article 78 proceeding to redress the serious and continuing infringement on his Presidential immunity from criminal process that he holds as the 45th and soon-to-be 47th President of the United States of America,” the filing said.
The president-elected faces up to four years in prison, but Merchan last week indicated that he would sentence Trump to an unconditional discharge — effectively a blemish on Trump’s record, without prison, fines or probation — saying that would strike a balance between the duties of president and the sanctity of the jury’s verdict.
