JUST IN: Judge Issues Response To Trump’s Last-Minute Legal Move
In a late ruling on Monday, a New York judge denied President-elect Donald Trump’s request to delay his sentencing hearing, scheduled for Friday, January 10. The decision, issued by state Judge Juan Merchan, marks another development in Trump’s ongoing legal battle just days before his inauguration.
Trump’s attorneys argued in a filing made public earlier Monday that the court should vacate the sentencing hearing and suspend all deadlines until appeals concerning presidential immunity are resolved. They contended that presidential immunity extends into the transition period and protects Trump not just from liability but from the legal process itself. The appeal requested a hearing date of January 27, one week after Trump’s inauguration.
Merchan, however, rejected the request in a swift ruling later that evening, “This Court has considered Defendant’s arguments in support of his motion and finds that they are for the most part, a repetition of the arguments he has raised numerous times in the past,” wrote Merchan according to NBC News.
Trump’s legal team’s primary contention centers on the constitutional protections afforded to a sitting president. They argue that Trump’s first-term immunity precluded the use of evidence regarding official conduct before the grand jury, which they claim tainted the indictment and subsequent jury verdict. Additionally, they assert that immunity during the transition period necessitates a halt to legal proceedings until appeals are fully resolved.
The defense also cited New York legal precedents, claiming that criminal cases are typically stayed when appeals challenge a lower court’s jurisdiction. Though New York law makes such stays discretionary, Trump’s attorneys insisted that denying a stay for the president-elect would be unprecedented and improper. The decision could force Trump’s team to escalate their appeal, potentially bringing the case before the New York appellate court, the state’s highest court, or even the U.S. Supreme Court.
Lgal analyst Margot Cleveland pointed out that Merchan’s decision leaves Trump’s legal team with limited options. “If he denies the stay or delays a decision too long, Trump’s team will need to seek a stay from the New York appellate court, then New York’s highest court, and finally, the U.S. Supreme Court,” Cleveland wrote on X.
10/ Ball is now in Merchan’s court. He has three options: a) Deny; b) Delay; or c) Grant. If he denies the stay or delays a decision too long, Trump’s team will need to seek a stay from the NY appellate court, then NY’s highest court, and then US Supreme Court.
— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) January 6, 2025
Trump’s attorneys argue that the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution mandates an automatic stay, effectively halting proceedings in the face of ongoing appeals. This contention draws on past cases where courts have paused proceedings to preserve the benefits of immunity from the legal process. Additionally, the defense’s appeal highlights a broader debate about the balance between executive privilege and judicial oversight.
The case could set a precedent for how future courts handle similar immunity claims involving high-ranking officials. As the sentencing date approaches, the ball is now in the appellate courts’ court. If Trump’s team succeeds in obtaining a stay, it could significantly delay the judicial process, potentially stretching beyond his inauguration. Such a move would intensify scrutiny of the judiciary’s handling of high-profile cases involving political figures.
Cleveland speculated that Merchan’s decision might prompt a higher court to step in. “I think there are very few folks with an appetite to continue with lawfare after Trump’s win of both the electoral college and the popular vote,” she stated.
13/ My gut is that Merchan has no desire to stand down and will force the NY appellate court to enter a stay which I think it will do: I think there are very few folks with an appetite to continue with lawfare after Trump’s win of both electoral college & popular vote.
— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) January 6, 2025
If the appellate courts grant a stay, it could be seen as a validation of Trump’s immunity claims, while a denial might embolden prosecutors in future cases involving presidents or other high-ranking officials.