Prosecutors: Trump's hush money conviction should stand despite immunity ruling

Photo : AP

Former President Donald Trump, who is the Republican nominee for the November 5 election, faces a significant legal challenge as Manhattan prosecutors assert that his recent conviction should remain valid despite a U.S. Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity. On May 30, Trump was found guilty of 34 felony counts related to falsifying business records, aimed at concealing a $130,000 hush payment made by his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, to porn star Stormy Daniels.

The Manhattan District Attorney’s office, led by Alvin Bragg, has filed a response urging the court to reject Trump’s attempt to overturn the verdict. The July 24 court filing counters Trump’s argument that the conviction should be invalidated in light of the Supreme Court's ruling which established that sitting presidents cannot face criminal charges over official acts.

Stay informed with the latest news. Follow DXB News Network on WhatsApp Channel 

Prosecutors argue that the Supreme Court decision, which was made on July 1, does not impact their case. They contend that the charges against Trump involve personal misconduct rather than official presidential duties. The filing notes that the legal issues in Trump’s case are centered around personal matters, including the alleged attempt to cover up an affair with Daniels before the 2016 presidential election.

In their defense, Trump’s legal team had sought to dismiss the verdict by arguing that the trial improperly included evidence related to his official acts as president. This contention came after the Supreme Court's 6-3 ruling clarified that evidence of official acts cannot be considered in private matter prosecutions.

Key points of contention include Trump's 2018 Twitter posts about Cohen, which the defense argues were official communications. However, prosecutors assert these posts were made in Trump's "unofficial capacity" and thus are relevant to the case.

Additionally, Trump’s lawyers have objected to the testimony of two former White House aides and the inclusion of a financial disclosure form that mentioned Trump's reimbursement to Cohen. Prosecutors have countered these objections, stating that the aides testified on personal matters and that the disclosure form pertained to Trump’s private financial affairs.

Manhattan Judge Juan Merchan, who has postponed Trump’s sentencing from July 11 to September 18, is expected to address these arguments by September 6. The outcome will determine whether the conviction stands and if the case moves forward to sentencing. Should the conviction be upheld, Trump will have the opportunity to appeal both the verdict and the subsequent sentencing to a higher court.