Help others make the right choice.

Judge Denies Trump's Request to Dismiss Hush Money Conviction

A New York judge has rejected former President Donald Trump’s bid to overturn his hush money conviction, citing the recent Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity as irrelevant to the case. However, the long-term future of the case remains uncertain as legal arguments continue to unfold.

The Ruling

Manhattan Judge Juan M. Merchan ruled on Monday that the conviction, stemming from 34 counts of falsifying business records related to a $130,000 payment to Stormy Daniels, stands. Trump’s lawyers had argued that the Supreme Court’s ruling—protecting ex-presidents from prosecution for official acts—should nullify the use of certain evidence presented at trial.

Merchan disagreed, stating that the evidence in question, such as social media posts and financial disclosures, related to Trump’s personal life rather than official conduct. Even if some evidence could be considered improper, Merchan deemed any error harmless given the “overwhelming evidence of guilt.”

Trump’s Defense and Prosecution’s Response

Trump’s communications director, Steven Cheung, criticized the decision as a “direct violation of the Supreme Court’s decision on immunity.” He called for the case to be immediately dismissed, branding it “lawless.”

Prosecutors argued that the contested evidence was a minor part of the case, and they welcomed Merchan’s assertion that Trump’s actions—reimbursing a hush money payment to cover up alleged personal misconduct—did not fall under presidential duties.

Legal and Political Implications

The decision comes at a pivotal moment, as Trump prepares to return to the presidency on January 20. His lawyers claim the case undermines the presidential transition and raises constitutional concerns about disruptions to the office.

Prosecutors have suggested several potential compromises, including pausing the case until Trump leaves office, agreeing that any sentence would exclude jail time, or closing the case without sentencing but maintaining the conviction. Trump’s defense team dismissed these options as “absurd.”

A Historic Precedent

Trump is the first former president to be convicted of a felony and the first convicted criminal to win reelection. While this case is the only one of his four indictments to reach trial, other cases, including a state election interference case in Georgia, remain on hold.

As the legal battles continue, the hush money case highlights the unprecedented challenges of navigating criminal convictions alongside a presidency. The ultimate resolution remains unclear, but the ruling underscores the delicate balance between upholding the law and maintaining the integrity of the executive office.