NEW YORK — The judge in Donald Trump’s silence case has postponed the date for a key ruling on presidential immunity until two days before Trump’s scheduled sentencing.
The decision on immunity was supposed to be made on September 6, while the verdict was supposed to be made on September 18. But then Trump’s lawyers last week asked Judge Juan M. Merchan to rule first on their renewed attempt to have the judge drop the case.
In a letter made public on Tuesday, Judge Juan M. Merchan postponed the immunity decision until Sept. 16, if it is still needed after he decides next week whether to recuse himself.
Merchan said the Republican presidential candidate must still appear in court on Sept. 18 for “imposition of sentence or other appropriate proceedings.”
Trump’s lawyer Todd Blanche and the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office, which is handling the case, declined to comment.
A jury Trump found guilty in May for falsifying business records to cover up a deal to pay porn actress Stormy Daniels shortly before the 2016 election. At the time, she was considering going public with a story about a sexual encounter with Trump a decade earlier.
Trump’s former lawyer Michael Cohen paid Daniels and was later reimbursed by Trump, whose firm reported the reimbursement as legal fees. Prosecutors said it was an attempt to conceal the true nature of the transactions and the underlying hush-money deal.
Trump denies Daniels’ claim, insists he did nothing wrong and says the case is politically motivated. Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg is a Democrat.
Trump’s lawyers say the Supreme Court’s July ruling ruling on presidential immunity orders to overturn May’s guilty verdict and dismiss the hush money case against Trump entirely. The defense has also claims the process was “tainted” by evidence that should not have been admitted under the Supreme Court ruling, such as testimony from some of Trump’s White House aides and tweets he sent as president in 2018.
The Supreme Court ruling limits the prosecution of former presidents for official acts and limits the ability of prosecutors to cite official acts as evidence that a commander in chief’s unofficial acts were illegal.
The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office states that the Supreme Court’s opinion “has no effect” in the hush money case because it involves unofficial acts from which the former president is not immune.
Meanwhile, Trump’s lawyers last week asked Merchan for a third time to withdraw from the case, saying his daughter’s work for Vice President Kamala Harris’ 2020 presidential campaign has raised questions about his ability to be impartial. Harris is now the Democratic presidential nominee.
Merchan rejected two previous motions to recusal last year, saying the defense’s concerns were “hypothetical” and based on “innuendo” and “unfounded speculation.”
But Trump’s lawyer Todd Blanche argued that Harris’ participation in the presidential race makes these issues “even more concrete” and said the judge had not addressed them in enough detail.
The hush money case is one of four criminal charges filed against Trump last year.
One federal case, in which Trump was accused of illegally storing classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida, was turned down last month. The Ministry of Justice is appealing.
The others – federal And state of Georgia Cases involving Trump’s efforts to overturn his 2020 election defeat will not go to trial before the November election.