Donald Trump’s felony conviction in the New York hush money case should not be tossed out because of the Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity, Judge Juan Merchan ruled Monday.
Merchan’s decision rejected one of several avenues that Trump’s lawyers have taken to try to dismiss Trump’s May guilty verdict on 34 counts of falsifying business records. The judge did not, however, rule on a motion from Trump’s attorneys to dismiss the conviction because Trump has now been elected president.
Instead, his 41-page decision focused on the question of presidential immunity.
Merchan wrote the Supreme Court’s ruling that Trump should receive broad immunity for official acts during his time in office did not mean the conviction should be dismissed, ruling that the evidence presented by the Manhattan district attorney’s office was not related to Trump’s official conduct as president.
The evidence contested by Trump’s lawyers, the judge wrote, related “entirely to unofficial conduct” and should receive no immunity protections.
“This Court concludes that if error occurred regarding the introduction of the challenged evidence, such error was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt,” Merchan wrote. “Even if this Court did find that the disputed evidence constitutes official acts under the auspices of the Trump decision, which it does not, Defendant’s motion is still denied as introduction of the disputed evidence constitutes harmless error and no mode of proceedings error has taken place.”
Trump transition spokesman Steven Cheung said in a statement that Merchan’s decision “is a direct violation of the Supreme Court’s decision on immunity, and other longstanding jurisprudence.”
Trump’s lawyers are likely to appeal Merchan’s decision, one of several potential motions for dismissal that could leave the case tied up for months or even years. Merchan still has to rule on Trump’s argument that his status as president was a “legal impediment” to further criminal proceedings and the case should be dismissed as a result.
Trump has yet to be sentenced following his May conviction. Prosecutors have already agreed the president-elect would not be sentenced while he is in office, but the district attorney’s office has argued in legal filings that the felony conviction should still stand. Prosecutors wrote that while the sentence could be delayed or modified, dismissing a jury’s conviction altogether would be an unwarranted “extreme remedy.”
Trump was convicted in May on 34 counts of falsifying business records over payments to his then-lawyer Michael Cohen to reimburse a $130,000 hush money payment made to adult-film star Stormy Daniels, in order to keep her from speaking out about an alleged affair before the 2016 election. Trump has denied the affair.
Trump was initially scheduled to be sentenced in July, but that was postponed twice as a result of the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity ruling, pushing a sentencing date back until after the election.
Trump’s lawyers argued that the conviction should be dismissed on the basis of the Supreme Court’s decision because prosecutors relied on evidence from Trump’s official conduct in the White House.
Merchan rejected that claim in his decision, writing that the evidence they contested was not tied to Trump’s official acts as president. In his decision, Merchan walked through several pieces of testimony that Trump’s lawyers claimed should not have been heard at trial because of the immunity decision, including from White House aides Hope Hicks and Madeleine Westerhout, as well as Cohen.
Merchan wrote that it was “logical and reasonable to conclude that if the act of falsifying records to cover up the payments so that the public would not be made aware is decidedly an unofficial act, so too should the communications to further that same cover-up be unofficial.”
Merchan disclosed in a letter to the attorneys Monday that Trump’s defense team alleged juror misconduct early this month, but that Trump’s team has not filed a motion to dismiss the conviction based on the allegations. The judge wrote Trump’s lawyers would need to file a proper motion if they want him to act on it.
Details of the allegations could come out in filings Merchan ordered the attorneys to release about the purported issue, with redactions.
“Allegations of juror misconduct should be thoroughly investigated. However, this Court is prohibited from deciding such claims on the basis of mere hearsay and conjecture,” Merchan wrote. “This Court cannot allow the public filing of unsworn, and admittedly contested statements. To do so would threaten the safety of the jurors and violate the agreed upon Order Regulating Disclosure of Juror Information.”
