Judge Rejects Trump’s Immunity Claim in Hush Money Case, Conviction Stands

[Social Media]

 

The legal battles surrounding Donald Trump have taken another turn as New York Justice Juan Merchan refused to dismiss the guilty verdict against the former president in his hush money case. Trump, who appears poised to reenter the White House, is likely to do so as the first convicted felon president, raising unprecedented legal and political questions.  

 

Trump’s attorneys had argued that his status as a president-elect granted him immunity from prosecution. They claimed the jury’s conviction — tied to falsified business records and payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels — should be overturned. However, Judge Merchan rejected the argument, emphasizing that the evidence of guilt was overwhelming and that the crimes were unrelated to presidential duties.

 

“If error occurred regarding the introduction of the challenged evidence, such error was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt,” Merchan stated. The judge underscored that the evidence presented to the jury involved personal actions, not conduct tied to the presidency, and therefore was not protected by any form of immunity.  

 

The charges stem from a scheme to silence Daniels during Trump’s 2016 campaign. Her story of an alleged affair threatened to disrupt his political momentum, prompting his then-lawyer Michael Cohen to pay her $130,000. Trump’s reimbursement to Cohen was falsely recorded as legal expenses, leading to a jury convicting Trump on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records.  

 

Trump’s legal team has contended that his “overwhelming victory” in the presidential election and his role as a “soon-to-be sitting president” justify broader immunity protections. They also argued that the ongoing criminal proceedings could unconstitutionally distract from his forthcoming presidency. Despite these claims, Merchan made it clear that the law does not shield personal acts falling outside the scope of official presidential duties.  

 

“There is no danger of intrusion on the authority and function of the Executive Branch in this case,” Merchan wrote, noting that Trump’s actions were not protected by the Supreme Court’s recent rulings on presidential immunity. While the Supreme Court granted absolute immunity for actions tied to official duties, it does not extend to personal misconduct outside the “outer perimeter” of presidential authority.  

 

Manhattan prosecutors, led by District Attorney Alvin Bragg, argued against dismissing the verdict or delaying sentencing indefinitely. They stated that “president-elect immunity does not exist” and warned against the extreme remedy of erasing the jury’s unanimous guilty verdict. Prosecutors suggested delaying sentencing until Trump’s presidency ends in 2029, reflecting the unusual circumstances of the case.  

 

This legal standoff places Trump in uncharted territory. While his attorneys seek to halt proceedings, it is increasingly likely he will assume office without facing immediate consequences for the convictions against him.  

 

Complicating matters further, special counsel Jack Smith has paused federal criminal investigations into Trump for now, and an appeals court in Georgia has delayed hearings on his election interference case. Nonetheless, the ongoing legal challenges cast a shadow over Trump’s potential return to the presidency, creating an unprecedented intersection of politics and criminal law.  

 

Based on a report by The Independent 2024-12-18

 

 

 

[jippytum]

As a trump supporter  i think these charges where politically motivated. However after having been found guilty i think the judges ruling not to overturn the verdict and the reasons for not doing so are correct. 

[JonnyF]

Who cares? Everyone knows they were politically motivated charges heard in a kangaroo court. Let the salty Libs cry "convicted felon" if it makes them happy. It certainly didn't matter to the voters. 

 

Trump will soon be President again. That's what matters.

[stevenl]

6 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Who cares? Everyone knows they were politically motivated charges heard in a kangaroo court. Let the salty Libs cry "convicted felon" if it makes them happy. It certainly didn't matter to the voters. 

 

Trump will soon be President again. That's what matters.

To answer your question, Trump cares.

[JonnyF]

7 minutes ago, stevenl said:

To answer your question, Trump cares.

 

He'll take one for the team. 

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

 

He'll take one for the team. 

I’m sure he will, he’ll take a great deal.

 

[JonnyF]

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I’m sure he will, he’ll take a great deal.

 

 

Starting with Biden and Harris' reputation/soul. 

[stevenl]

13 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

He'll take one for the team. 

With trump there is no team, only me, myself and i. And he cares, unless you think he won't appeal?

[LosLobo]

35 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

He'll take one for the team. 

And the team will pay the legal bills.....

[JonnyF]

3 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

And the team will pay the legal bills.....

 

The Dems shouldn't have tried to retain power with lawfare then.  

[newbee2022]

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

Who cares? Everyone knows they were politically motivated charges heard in a kangaroo court. Let the salty Libs cry "convicted felon" if it makes them happy. It certainly didn't matter to the voters. 

 

Trump will soon be President again. That's what matters.

Yeah, try to get a membership in his gangster gang already?

[JonnyF]

11 minutes ago, newbee2022 said:

Yeah, try to get a membership in his gangster gang already?

 

The only gangster gang was the Biden crime family, and they'll be gone soon once Joe has pardoned his crack addict gun toting prostitute using son Hunter (after promising not to).

 

[riclag]

51 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Who cares? Everyone knows they were politically motivated charges heard in a kangaroo court. Let the salty Libs cry "convicted felon" if it makes them happy. It certainly didn't matter to the voters. 

 

Trump will soon be President again. That's what matters.

We Americans have a history of 

lawlessness ! The founding fathers if captured would of been hanged for treason. What matters is the circumstances behind the lawfare,it was all by design, it was a Dem controlled conspiracy to bring Trump down! Americans will not accept a bias 

judge attempt to make mockery of the Constitution through malicious lawfare.

“When the 56 men signed the Declaration of Independence, they knew full well that they were committing treason against England and they knew the penalty—death”.

https://forestlawn.com/2018/07/02/56-and-treason-the-declaration-of-independence/
 

 

[JonnyF]

8 minutes ago, riclag said:

We Americans have a history of 

lawlessness ! The founding fathers if captured would of been hanged for treason. What matters is the circumstances behind the lawfare,it was all by design, it was a Dem controlled conspiracy to bring Trump down! Americans will not accept a bias 

judge attempt to make mockery of the Constitution through malicious lawfare.

“When the 56 men signed the Declaration of Independence, they knew full well that they were committing treason against England and they knew the penalty—death”.

https://forestlawn.com/2018/07/02/56-and-treason-the-declaration-of-independence/
 

 

 

I have great respect for the American people for seeing through the lies and machinations of the Democrats and re-electing Trump.

 

They have spoken, and Joe needs to get his lying derriere out of the white house ASAP. 

[Srikcir]

"Judge rules Trump’s conviction withstands Supreme Court immunity decision," (my bold)

by Zach Schonfeld and Ella Lee - 12/16/24 https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/5043247-trump-hush-money-conviction-uphold/

"A New York judge upheld a jury’s verdict that convicted President-elect Trump of a felony, ruling the outcome of the hush money case can withstand the Supreme Court's new test for presidential immunity." (my italics)

 

 

[phetphet]

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

 

He'll take one for the team. 

Why? Can't he just pardon himself once in Office?

[riclag]

15 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

"Judge rules Trump’s conviction withstands Supreme Court immunity decision," (my bold)

by Zach Schonfeld and Ella Lee - 12/16/24 https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/5043247-trump-hush-money-conviction-uphold/

"A New York judge upheld a jury’s verdict that convicted President-elect Trump of a felony, ruling the outcome of the hush money case can withstand the Supreme Court's new test for presidential immunity." (my italics)

 

 

First ,Merchan the dem NY judge doesn’t rule/ decide over the 

Scotus!

 

The Scotus always has the last say!

Still waiting for the adjudicated verdict 

process of criminality by the dem judge! Until then Trump isnt a dem convicted felon.

 

[Skeptic7]

29 minutes ago, phetphet said:

Why? Can't he just pardon himself once in Office?

Despite the uncertainty/lawfulness of a president being able to pardon themselves...it's an unknown. Never been done before and never even been considered before the lifelong criminal and president named Teflon Don Trump. Presidents do not have pardoning power for state crimes.

 

From Google AI...

"No, the president cannot grant pardons for state crimes: 

Federal vs. state crimes: The president's power to pardon only applies to federal crimes, not state or local offenses.

Governors and state pardon boards: Governors or a state pardon board handle pardons for state crimes."