In one decision 41 pages long, Judge Merchan affirmed that “Mr. Trump’s clearly personal act of falsifying business records does not pose a risk of violating the authority and functions of the executive branch,” according to Reuters.
Former US President Donald Trump, accompanied by lawyer Todd Blanche, speaks to the press as he arrives to attend the criminal trial on the hush money case at Manhattan Criminal Court in New York City (USA) May 30
Mr. Trump’s lawyer did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Judge Merchan’s new ruling.
Previously, President-elect Trump’s lawyers argued that letting the above case hang over his head during his presidency would hinder his ability to govern, according to Reuters.
At first, Mr. Trump was scheduled to be sentenced on November 26, but Judge Merchan postponed it indefinitely after Mr. Trump won the 2024 US presidential election. Mr. Trump will be inaugurated as president on November 26. January 20, 2025.
At the end of May, Mr. Trump was indicted by a jury in New York on all 34 counts of falsifying business records to conceal a hush money payment to a porn star before the year’s election. 2016. This was the first time a former or current US president was convicted or charged with a criminal offense. Mr. Trump’s side has denied all charges.
In July, the US Supreme Court, in a ruling arising from one of two federal cases against Trump, decided that presidents are immune from prosecution related to their official acts. they and juries may not present evidence of official acts in tort trials. This is the first time the court has recognized the extent of presidential immunity related to prosecution.
Lawyers for President-elect Trump argued that the jury that convicted him in New York was shown evidence by prosecutors of his social media posts as president and had hear testimony from his former aides about conversations that took place at the White House during his 2017-2021 term.
Meanwhile, prosecutors at the Alvin Bragg prosecutor’s office in Manhattan district (New York) countered that the Supreme Court’s ruling was not related to the case, which they said involved “complete conduct”. completely unofficial”. In its ruling, the US Supreme Court did not recognize any immunity for a president’s unofficial acts, according to Reuters.
