Trump’s Hush Money Sentencing Faces Potential Delay as Legal Battle Continues
President-elect Donald Trump’s scheduled sentencing in his hush-money case faces potential delays as legal arguments over presidential immunity continue. New York appeals court judge Ellen Gesmer recently rejected Trump’s attempt to postpone the sentencing, but the former president’s legal team may still seek intervention from higher courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court.
Trump’s lawyers argue that presidential immunity should extend to him as president-elect, a claim that Judge Gesmer questioned during recent proceedings. Prosecutor Steven Wu countered this argument, citing the “one president at a time” principle. Trump’s attorney, Todd Blanche, expressed concerns about the impact of sentencing on the presidential transition process.
Despite the ongoing legal battle, Judge Juan M. Merchan has indicated that no jail time, fines, or probation is planned for Trump. The judge suggested that an unconditional discharge might be the most viable sentence. However, Trump’s defense team argues that any sentencing could interfere with his presidency.
The case stems from Trump’s conviction on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records, related to a hush money payment made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels during the 2016 campaign. The charges specifically involve how Trump reimbursed his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, for the payment to Daniels.
If sentencing is delayed past Inauguration Day, presidential immunity could potentially pause proceedings. Manhattan prosecutors emphasize the public interest in prompt prosecution and finality, noting that the case has already seen multiple delays.
This legal battle marks a historic moment, as Trump is set to become the first president to take office after a criminal conviction. The ongoing proceedings echo previous efforts by Trump’s legal team to delay his trial and sentencing.
As the legal arguments continue, all eyes remain on the courts to see how this unprecedented situation will unfold and what implications it may have for the incoming administration.
