Juan Merchan, the trial judge, is scheduled to sentence former President Donald Trump in mid-September after a jury found him guilty of 34 counts of falsifying records in Manhattan.
In the time since the trial, several events have occurred that could impact the sentencing. Not least is the Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity. This ruling caused a delay of the sentencing, which was originally scheduled for July 11, so that Merchan could determine the impact it has on the trial proceedings and his evidentiary decisions. Trump’s legal team filed post-trial motions to set aside the jury verdict. They also requested Merchan’s disqualification from the case due to his perceived conflicts of interest.
Trump’s legal team sought again on Tuesday to transfer the case from New York State Court back to federal court, claiming that the trial against him had been biased and that Trump should be immune from prosecution by the Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity.
Senior Judge Alvin Kenneth Hellerstein denied Trump’s most recent request in a four-page ruling. Hellerstein was the judge who initially oversaw Trump’s attempt to transfer the case to New York’s Southern District of New York for 2023. Hellerstein stated in the entire order that he did not have the authority to decide the appropriateness of the Manhattan Trial. That decision is left to the New York appeals courts.
Hellerstein did agree that the argument about immunity needed to be reviewed. Hellerstein referred to his order of July 2023, where he determined that immunity did apply to the conduct Trump was accused of, and stated:
In my Order and Opinion dated July 19, 2023, (ECF No. “[h]ush-money paid to an adult movie star is not connected to the official acts of a president.” It has no bearing on the official duties of the President. Id. Id. I made my decision after a hearing in which The People proved that Michael Cohen reimbursed Mr. Trump for the advance of hush money, including two checks written by Mr. Trump at the White House. I held that Mr. Trump did not meet the burden of proof to prove the basis for removal. I still hold that reimbursement for hush funds is appropriate, regardless of whether The People has the burden of proof or Mr. Trump. The Supreme Court’s ruling does not change my earlier conclusion that the payments of hush money were private and unofficial, and outside the scope of executive authority.
Hellerstein has again refused Trump’s request to transfer the case to federal court.
Hellerstein’s decision came after Manhattan prosecutors objected to Trump’s attempt to delay decisions on the case following the trial while he asked the federal court to step in.
In a letter sent to the judge who presided over the case at state court, the Manhattan district attorney said that the judge had no obligation to wait until Hellerstein ruled before making any post-trial rulings.
The prosecution urged Juan M. Merchan to not delay ruling on two important defense requests. Trump’s request to delay sentencing to after the November elections, and his attempt to overturn and dismiss the verdict in light of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling regarding presidential immunity.
Merchan will likely rule on Trump’s motion on September 16 to overturn the verdict. If he rejects the motion, then sentencing will take place on September 18, assuming he does not deny it.
