President-elect Donald Trump’s sentencing in a New York state case in which he was convicted of falsifying business records is now in limbo.
Trump had been scheduled to be sentenced on 34 felony convictions on Nov. 26. However, as he prepares to return to the White House, his lawyers are calling for the case to be dismissed, according to the New York Post.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg indicated that although he supports a delay, his office is not ready to dismiss the case.
Bragg’s office said a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that presidents have broad immunity for their official acts does not cover Trump’s case.
“No current law establishes that a president’s temporary immunity from prosecution requires dismissal of a post-trial criminal proceeding that was initiated at a time when the defendant was not immune from criminal prosecution and that is based on unofficial conduct for which the defendant is also not immune,” Bragg wrote in court documents.
Bragg asked for a delay until Dec. 9 to decide what his office will do.
Should all the cases against Trump be dismissed?
Yes: 99% (78 Votes)
No: 1% (1 Votes)
One option under consideration is whether to freeze the case until Trump’s term ends in January 2025.
Judge Juan Merchan has not issued a timetable for when he will rule about what comes next.
Steven Cheung, Trump’s communications director, said in a post on X that Trump has emerged as the winner.
“This is a total and definitive victory for President Trump and the American People who elected him in a landslide,” Cheung said in the statement.
“The Manhattan DA has conceded that this Witch Hunt cannot continue,” the statement said.
🚨 NEW: Statement from Trump Communications Director @StevenCheung on President Trump’s total and definitive victory against Alvin Bragg’s corrupt witch hunt. pic.twitter.com/DHTZMLqVEA
— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) November 19, 2024
“The lawless case is now stayed, and President Trump’s legal team is moving to get it dismissed once and for all,” Cheung said in a statement.
Legal scholar Jonathan Turley scoffed at Bragg’s concept of putting the case on ice.
The proposal would “allow a city prosecutor to put a leash on a sitting president for four years,” Turley wrote in an Op-Ed in the New York Post.
Turley called Trump’s election “arguably the largest jury decision in history.”
He said some evidence used against Trump likely would be stricken due to the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling.
“The prosecutors not only elicited testimony from Trump aides in the White House but then doubled down on the significance of that evidence in their closing arguments. Merchan could declare that the court cannot rule out the impact of such testimony on the final verdict,” he wrote.
Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.
