The judge rules that Trump does not have the protection of presidential immunity in connection with the hush money conviction

CNN
—

Donald Trump’s felony conviction in the New York hush money case should not be thrown out because of the Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity, Judge Juan Merchan ruled Monday.

Merchan’s decision rejected one of several avenues Trump’s lawyers have taken to try to overturn Trump’s May’s guilty verdict on 34 counts of falsifying business documents. However, the judge did not rule on a motion by Trump’s lawyers to dismiss the conviction because Trump has now been elected president.

Instead, his 41-page decision focused on the issue of presidential immunity.

Merchan wrote that the Supreme Court’s ruling that Trump should receive broad immunity for official acts while in office did not mean the conviction should be thrown out, ruling that the evidence presented by the Manhattan district attorney’s office was not related to Trump’s official conduct as president.

The evidence challenged by Trump’s lawyers, the judge wrote, related to “entirely unofficial conduct” and should not receive immunity protection.

“This court concludes that if error occurred with respect to the introduction of the challenged evidence, such error was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt,” Merchan wrote. “Even if this court were to find that the disputed evidence constitutes official acts under the Trump administration, which it does not, defendants’ motion is still denied because the introduction of the disputed evidence constitutes harmless error and has found no error in the procedure.”

Trump transition spokesman Steven Cheung said in a statement that Merchan’s decision “is in direct violation of the Supreme Court ruling on immunity and other longstanding case law.”

Trump’s lawyers are likely to appeal Merchan’s decision, one of several potential dismissal requests that could leave the case tied up for months or even years. Merchan must still rule on Trump’s argument that his status as president was a “legal impediment” to further criminal proceedings and the case should therefore be dismissed.

Trump has not yet been sentenced following his conviction in May. Prosecutors have already agreed that the president-elect would not be tried while in office, but the district attorney’s office has argued in legal filings that the conviction should still stand. Prosecutors wrote that while the verdict could be delayed or changed, rejecting a jury’s verdict entirely would be an unjustified “extreme remedy.”

Trump was convicted in May of 34 counts of falsifying business records over payments to his then-lawyer Michael Cohen to repay a $130,000 hush money payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels to prevent her from speaking out about an alleged affair before the election in 2016. Trump has denied the affair.

Trump was originally scheduled to be sentenced in July, but it was postponed twice as a result of the Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity, pushing a sentencing date back to after the election.

Trump’s lawyers argued that the conviction should be thrown out based on the Supreme Court’s ruling 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 challenged was not linked to Trump’s official actions as president. In his decision, Merchan reviewed several testimonies that Trump’s lawyers argued should not have been heard at trial because of the immunity ruling, 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 certainly an unofficial act, then the communication in furtherance of the same concealment should also be unofficial.”

Merchan revealed in a letter to lawyers Monday that Trump’s defense team alleged legal misconduct earlier this month, but that Trump’s team has not filed a motion to dismiss the conviction based on the allegations. The judge wrote that Trump’s lawyers would have to file a proper motion if they want him to act on it.

Details of the allegations could come out in archives, Merchan ordered the lawyers to release about the alleged problem, 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 permit the public filing of unsolicited and admittedly contested statements. To do so would threaten the safety of jurors and violate the agreed-upon executive order on the release of juror information.”

This story has been updated with additional details.