Former President Donald Trump’s attorneys have petitioned a New York court to postpone his sentencing related to hush money payments, in light of a pivotal Supreme Court decision regarding presidential immunity.
This sentencing was initially set for July 11, but is now under review by Judge Juan Merchan, as the court assesses how this significant ruling impacts the proceedings.
The legal charges against Trump originate from allegations predating his presidency.
Nonetheless, his defense leverages the recent Supreme Court ruling to argue that certain evidences, including actions taken during his time in office, are protected under presidential immunity.
Although immunity was not claimed in this specific hush money trial, Trump’s team argued against the inclusion of evidence such as his social media commentary on former lawyer Michael Cohen, claiming it should be exempt due to the nature of the acts being presidential.
Trump faces 34 counts of falsifying business records, which prosecutors link to an attempt to obscure a payment to a porn actor shortly before the 2016 election. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office, although skeptical of Trump’s arguments, has agreed not to oppose the deferral of the sentencing.
This swift request from Trump’s legal team, submitted just hours after the Supreme Court’s decision, appears to be just the beginning of what may be extensive legal repercussions from a ruling celebrated by his supporters.
This ongoing case continues to draw attention, underscoring the legal challenges and debates over the extent of presidential immunity and its consequences on judicial proceedings.
As the case evolves, it serves as a crucial example of how legal strategies may evolve in response to higher judicial rulings, particularly concerning former U.S. Presidents.
