A New York appeals court on Tuesday refused to stay the criminal sentencing of President-elect Donald J. Trump, dashing his hopes of ending the case before returning to the White House.
Trump is scheduled to face sentencing on Friday, 10 days before being sworn in for a second term as president, and has asked a state appeals court to step in and freeze the proceedings. His lawyers may now file a last-minute appeal in federal court, arguing that Mr. Trump is entitled to full immunity from prosecution or even prison sentence now that he is president-elect.
The emergency application went to an appeals court judge, Ellen Gesmer, who held a brief hearing on Tuesday and rejected Trump’s request after 30 minutes.
During the hearing, Judge Geismer seemed highly skeptical of Trump’s arguments, asking his lawyers whether they “support the idea that presidential immunity extends to the president-elect?”
Attorney Todd Blanche admitted he did not do this, saying: “There has never been a case like this before.”
Since a New York jury found Trump guilty in May of 34 felony counts of falsifying records to cover up a sex scandal, making him the first former president to be convicted, he has sought to clarify the verdict, or at least delay it. .
For now, Judge Geismer’s decision narrows Trump’s path to victory and increases his chances of facing the embarrassment of a criminal sentence. From a legal perspective, the sentence would formalize Trump’s status as a felon, making him the first president to hold that dubious title.
Otherwise, this may be a largely token process. The judge presiding over the case, Juan M. Merchan, said last week that he would spare Trump jail time or any other substantial punishment.
The potential for leniency seemed to resonate with Judge Geismer, who stressed the point during the hearing and questioned why Mr Branch shouldn’t “take this seriously”.
Branch, who was appointed by Trump as the government’s deputy attorney general, did not respond to reporters’ questions as she left the court. A spokesman for the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office, which prosecuted Trump, declined to comment on Judge Geismer’s ruling.
Ultimately, Judge Geismer may not have the final say. Trump can now race to file suit in federal court in hopes of avoiding proceedings, and if that fails, he can ask the Supreme Court to intervene.
He will likely start with the New York federal appeals court, which is already considering his request to move the case out of state court, although some legal experts have expressed doubts that will succeed.
“I wouldn’t be surprised if he tried to get the federal courts to intervene at this point, but this is a Hail Mary,” said Mark Zauderer, a New York litigator who specializes in appeals.
Mr. Trump will also continue efforts to fight his conviction in state courts.
His lawyers filed a lawsuit against Merchant this week in a state appeals court challenging his recent decision to uphold Trump’s conviction. The action, which could take weeks or months to resolve, coincides with Trump’s more urgent request for an emergency stay of sentencing.
The one-two punch marks an aggressive escalation of Mr. Trump’s favorite legal tactic: delay.
After being sued four times in four jurisdictions, Trump relied heavily on this strategy, filing various appeals and other filings to buy time before Election Day.
When he won the election in November, his efforts paid off: The federal special prosecutors who filed two of the cases — one in Washington, D.C., the other in Florida — closed them, thanks to the administration of justice Ministry policy prohibiting prosecution of sitting lawmakers. In Georgia, where Trump is accused of trying to overturn the state’s 2020 election results, an appeals court disqualified the local prosecutor who brought the case, delaying the trial indefinitely.
In New York, Judge Merchants repeatedly delayed sentencing. He first postponed the trial in July to weigh whether Trump would dismiss the case based on a recent Supreme Court ruling granting the president broad immunity for his official actions. In the fall, the judge again punted to accommodate the presidential campaign, and after the election, Judge Merchant again suspended sentencing to consider the president-elect’s argument that his election victory should invalidate the case.
Judge Geismer noted the delays on Tuesday and attributed the alleged time crunch – with the sentencing coming so close to the inauguration – to many of Trump’s legal maneuvers.
“Judge Merchant is happy to defer sentencing in July,” Judge Geismer said.
In recent weeks, Judge Murchin began laying the groundwork for a last-minute sentencing, rejecting Trump’s arguments to dismiss the conviction.
On December 16, the judge rejected Trump’s request to dismiss the case based on the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling. While the high court has granted former presidents broad immunity for official actions taken while in office, the New York case involves a personal and political crisis that preceded Trump’s presidency: hush money payments he made to a porn star during the 2016 campaign. (The jury concluded that Trump orchestrated an elaborate scheme to falsify records to conceal the arrangement.)
Last week, Judge Murchin rejected Trump’s argument that his election victory should end the case entirely, concluding that overturning the jury’s verdict would “undermine the rule of law in immeasurable ways.”
Trump is now formally challenging those rulings at the Court of Appeal, filing a so-called Article 78 petition against Judge Merchan. It’s unclear when the court will accept Trump’s petition — a special proceeding used to challenge decisions made by New York state agencies and judges — but that likely won’t happen until after Trump takes office .
During Tuesday’s hearing, Steven Wu, an attorney for the district attorney’s office, argued that Trump’s claims of immunity were “baseless” and that the charges related to “unofficial events that occurred before he was president.” Behavior”. Mr. Wu also argued that Judge Murchin “went to great lengths to accommodate all of the defendant’s concerns,” noting that he allowed Trump to appear virtually for sentencing and not impose a prison sentence.
Before the election, Trump faced up to four years in prison, but legal experts predicted he would spend no more than a few weeks or months behind bars.
In a ruling last week, Judge Merchant said he would unconditionally relieve Trump of his sentence, a rare and lenient alternative to prison or probation. Unlike conditional discharge, which allows a defendant to avoid punishment if he pays compensation or keeps his job, unconditional discharge requires no requirements at all.
In an 18-page decision, Judge Merchan wrote that this sentence “appears to be the most feasible solution to ensure the ultimate outcome.”
