Trump Seeks to Overturn Hush Money Verdict Following Supreme Court Ruling

New York, The Gulf Observer: On Monday, Donald Trump’s legal team petitioned the New York judge overseeing his hush money trial to overturn his conviction and postpone the upcoming sentencing, scheduled for next week.

In a letter to Judge Juan M. Merchan, Trump’s lawyers referenced a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling and requested a delay in sentencing to allow the judge to consider the high court’s decision and its potential impact on the New York case. The letter, obtained by The Associated Press, highlighted that the Supreme Court ruling supports the defense’s earlier position that certain evidence, which they argued were official presidential acts, should have been excluded from the trial.

Previously, Trump has argued that he is immune from prosecution for actions taken during his presidency. Although this defense was not directly invoked in the hush money case, his lawyers contended that some evidence, including social media posts about his former lawyer Michael Cohen, should have been excluded under immunity protections.

The Manhattan district attorney’s office declined to comment on Monday night. The Supreme Court’s decision, issued the same day, marked the first recognition of broad immunity from prosecution for former presidents, which has implications for another ongoing case in Washington where Trump is charged with attempting to overturn the 2020 election results.

Trump was convicted in New York on 34 counts of falsifying business records related to an alleged attempt to cover up a hush money payment made before the 2016 presidential election. Sentencing in this case is set for July 11.

Judge Merchan had previously implemented a policy requiring both sides to submit one-page summaries of their arguments before making longer court filings, to manage the docket efficiently. Last year, in denying Trump’s request to transfer the trial from state to federal court, U.S. District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein ruled that the allegations were personal in nature and unrelated to Trump’s official duties as president.

“The evidence overwhelmingly suggests that the matter was purely a personal item of the President — a cover-up of an embarrassing event,” Judge Hellerstein wrote in his ruling.