According to a report released on Tuesday, the election victory of Donald Trump has posed a dilemma for the judge in New York responsible for his criminal case involving hush money payments. Can he continue to pass judgment on the President-elect? Or would doing so impede Trump’s ability to fulfill his constitutional responsibilities as the leader of the country?
Juan M. Merchan, the judge handling the case, has decided to postpone the case at least until November 19th to allow himself and the lawyers on both sides to weigh their next steps. The sentencing of Trump was originally scheduled for November 26th.
Trump’s lawyers have urged Merchan to overturn the judgment “for the sake of justice.” This marks the first criminal conviction of a former and future president of the United States.
Manhattan prosecutors have told Merchan that they are looking for a way to balance the interests between the jury’s verdict and Trump’s duties as president, citing a potential conflict.
Here are five possible outcomes that could follow in the case:
1. Merchan may choose to uphold the verdict without impeding Trump’s presidential term by delaying the judgment until the President-elect leaves office in 2029. By then, Trump will be 82 years old, and over a decade will have passed since the core events of the case.
2. Another option for Merchan to dismiss the case would be to approve Trump’s previous request to overturn the judgment, based on a Supreme Court ruling in July granting presidents broad immunity from criminal prosecution.
Merchan had initially planned to make a decision on Tuesday before the election results altered the timeline.
The Supreme Court ruling grants former presidents immunity from prosecution for official acts, and prohibits prosecutors from using evidence of official conduct in an attempt to prove that Trump’s personal actions were unlawful.
Trump’s lawyers have argued that the prosecutor’s testimonies regarding his first term and other inadmissible evidence “tainted” the case. The prosecutor stated that the Supreme Court ruling did not provide a basis for interfering with the jury’s decision.
The judge could also order a retrial, perhaps after Trump leaves office, or completely dismiss the charges.
Merchan could choose to postpone the case until the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit rules on Trump’s previous request to transfer the case from state to federal court.
Trump’s lawyers have been appealing a Manhattan federal judge’s decision to refuse to transfer the case. Their argument is that Trump’s case falls under the jurisdiction of the federal court because, as a former president, he has the right to claim immunity and seek dismissal of the charges.
Waiting for the Appeals Court’s decision could lead to further delays. The court has requested prosecutors to respond to Trump’s appeal by January 13th, just a week before his inauguration. Once in the White House, Trump’s legal team may present new arguments regarding presidential immunity.
Merchan could immediately dismiss the 34 felony charges of Trump’s falsification of business records, effectively ending the case. This would mean no judgment or punishment, potentially sparing the President-elect from incarceration or other penalties.
Trump’s lawyers insist that dismissing the case is the only way to “avoid unconstitutional hindrances” to his governance.
Prosecutors acknowledge that Trump’s conviction conflicting with the election outcome is “unprecedented,” but argue that the jury’s decision should stand.
Merchan could also choose to proceed with the judgment, at least as a trial run, assuming Trump’s lawyers do not appeal.
George Mason University law professor Ilya Somin suggests that there are “two possible outcomes” after the case reaches the sentencing stage.
He states that regardless, “imprisonment is unlikely.”
Trump could face fines, probation, or a maximum of four years in prison for his charges.
Somin mentions that, “any prison sentence could potentially be blocked or suspended in some way, but a lighter sentence may not have any substantial impact on Trump.”
(This article references reporting from the Associated Press)