Judge rejects Trump’s bid to toss hush money conviction

A Manhattan judge has denied former President Donald Trump’s request to dismiss his hush money conviction, despite his defense team’s citing the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling on presidential immunity.

This ruling blocks one possible avenue of relief ahead of Trump’s return to office next month, although other arguments for dismissal remain unresolved.

Judge Juan M. Merchan’s decision paves the way for the case to continue, but it remains unclear when a sentencing date will be set. Trump’s legal team has raised various arguments for the case’s dismissal, and while prosecutors have indicated that accommodations might be made for his upcoming presidency, they maintain that the conviction should stand.

Trump was convicted in May of 34 counts of falsifying business records in connection to a $130,000 hush money payment made to porn actress Stormy Daniels during the final days of his 2016 presidential campaign. The payment was allegedly made to prevent Daniels from publicizing her claim of a sexual encounter with Trump years earlier, which he denies.

The case gained renewed attention after the Supreme Court ruled last month that former presidents cannot be prosecuted for official acts carried out while in office. Trump’s lawyers argued that evidence related to his time in office, such as his presidential financial disclosure form and testimony from White House aides, should not have been used in the hush money trial. They claimed that the jury was improperly influenced by this information.

Judge Merchan, however, ruled that even if some evidence was tied to Trump’s official duties, the use of such evidence in the context of falsifying business records did not interfere with the executive branch’s authority. He emphasized that any potential error in introducing this evidence was harmless given the overwhelming evidence of guilt.

Trump’s communications director, Steven Cheung, called the ruling a “direct violation of the Supreme Court’s decision on immunity” and argued that the case should have never been brought.

Merchan’s decision also highlighted that the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling made it clear that not everything a president does is official. He noted that Trump’s social media posts, for instance, were personal in nature. The judge also referenced a prior ruling that classified the hush money payment as a personal matter, not an official act.

Trump, who will be inaugurated as president again on January 20, is the first former president in U.S. history to be convicted of a felony. He remains a central figure in multiple ongoing legal cases, including federal investigations into his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results and hoarding classified documents.

Following his successful election, Trump’s legal team has made multiple attempts to have the conviction dismissed, with some proposals from prosecutors suggesting ways to preserve the historic conviction, such as freezing the case until Trump’s potential departure from office in 2029. However, Trump’s defense has dismissed these suggestions, calling them “absurd.”