New York Justice Delays Ruling on Trump’s Immunity Arguments

New York State Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan has delayed ruling on President-elect Donald Trump’s immunity arguments in his falsified documents case.
“The joint application for a stay of the current deadlines, including decision on the Defendant’s CPL 330.30 motion, until Nov. 19, 2024 is granted,” Stephen Suhovsky, Merchan’s clerk, wrote in an email.
Both Emil Bove, one of Trump’s attorneys, and Manhattan prosecutor Matthew Colangelo cited Trump’s election win as a reason for delay. Merchan’s decision became public a week after the 2024 presidential election.
Bove indicated in his email to Merchan on Nov. 10 that a stay and eventual dismissal were necessary “to avoid unconstitutional impediments to President Trump’s ability to govern.”
Colangelo said that prosecutors “agree that these are unprecedented circumstances and that the arguments raised by defense counsel in correspondence to the People on Friday require careful consideration to ensure that any further steps in this proceeding appropriately balance the competing interests of (1) a jury verdict of guilt following trial that has the presumption of regularity; and (2) the Office of the President.”
He also asked the court to set Nov. 19 as a “deadline for the People to advise the Court regarding our view of appropriate steps going forward.”
Merchan had set Nov. 26 as a sentencing date.
Trump’s attorneys argued that the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. United States, which granted different levels of criminal immunity for presidents’ official conduct, barred the use of certain evidence and witness testimony. They asked Merchan to toss the verdict and the indictment.
In his July response to the request to dismiss the indictment, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg argued that Trump had waited too long to raise some of his arguments about immunity. He also said a federal judge had deemed the conduct in question—an alleged payment to Stephanie Clifford—outside of a president’s official duties.
Bragg’s office also pointed Merchan to a portion of Hellerstein’s opinion remarking on Trump’s conduct after he entered office.
“Reimbursing Cohen for advancing hush money to Stephanie Clifford cannot be considered the performance of a constitutional duty,” Hellerstein said. “Falsifying business records to hide such reimbursement, and to transform the reimbursement into a business expense for Trump and income to Cohen, likewise does not relate to a presidential duty.”