Judge deliberates Trump’s fate as Manhattan DA proposes unprecedented alternatives to dismissing hush money conviction.
At a Glance
- Manhattan DA opposes dismissing Trump’s 34 felony counts, suggests alternative accommodations
- Prosecutors argue presidential immunity begins at inauguration, not as president-elect
- DA proposes non-incarceration sentencing or delaying sentencing until Trump leaves office
- Trump’s lawyers push for immediate dismissal, threatening federal court appeal
- Judge Juan Merchan to decide case’s future, with ruling expected before Trump takes office
Manhattan DA Fights to Uphold Trump’s Conviction
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office has taken a firm stand against dismissing Donald Trump’s hush money charges, despite the former president’s recent election victory. The prosecutors argue that Trump’s claims of “presidential immunity” do not justify throwing out the jury’s guilty verdict on 34 felony counts related to falsifying business records.
The DA’s office has proposed several alternatives to outright dismissal, acknowledging the need to balance the demands of the presidency with the integrity of the legal process. These options include postponing Trump’s sentencing until after he leaves office, potentially in 2029, or ending the case without sentencing while maintaining the conviction.
The Manhattan district attorney agrees to postpone President-elect Donald Trump's sentencing in the hush money case https://t.co/uH1RZRcZHs
— CNN (@CNN) November 19, 2024
Presidential Immunity Debate
At the heart of this legal battle is the question of when presidential immunity begins. Trump’s lawyers argue for immediate dismissal, citing his status as president-elect. However, prosecutors assert that such immunity only takes effect at inauguration, not during the transition period.
“There are no grounds for such relief now, prior to defendant’s inauguration, because President-elect immunity does not exist,” Bragg said.
This stance directly challenges Trump’s legal team, who argue that continuing the case would disrupt his transition efforts and preparation for office. The prosecutors, however, maintain that alternative accommodations can address any concerns about presidential immunity without resorting to the “extreme remedy” of dismissing the indictment and vacating the jury verdict.
Proposed Alternatives and Their Implications
Assistant District Attorney Christopher Conroy laid out several options for Judge Juan Merchan to consider. These include non-incarceration sentencing or delaying sentencing until Trump leaves office. The DA’s office argues that these alternatives would “prevent defendant from being burdened during his presidency by an ongoing criminal proceeding” while still respecting the jury’s verdict.
These proposals highlight the unprecedented nature of the situation: a sitting president facing criminal charges. The DA’s office is attempting to navigate this uncharted legal territory while maintaining the integrity of the judicial process and respecting the office of the presidency.
Trump’s Legal Team Pushes Back
Trump’s attorneys are not backing down, characterizing the case as “failed lawfare” and arguing that it disrupts the president-elect’s transition efforts. They’ve threatened to appeal to federal court if the case isn’t dismissed, setting the stage for a potentially protracted legal battle that could extend well into Trump’s presidency.
Trump himself has consistently denied wrongdoing, labeling this and other cases against him as “witch hunts.” His transition team has yet to comment on the DA’s latest filing, maintaining a strategic silence as the legal proceedings unfold.
