The future of President-elect Donald Trump’s hush money case remained uncertain Monday morning as Manhattan Judge Juan Merchan and District Attorney Alvin Bragg met with Trump’s lawyers to discuss how to proceed, and it now appears that observers will have to wait for another chapter to unfold. Merchan indicated on Tuesday that he would delay a decision on whether to dismiss the case entirely in light of the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling, according to the Associated Press.
Trump’s attorneys, who had previously been convicted on 34 felony counts, have called for the case to be dismissed, citing his election win and the necessity for him to govern. The unprecedented situation of a future president facing sentencing for a criminal conviction has left both Merchan and Bragg—whom Trump views as political adversaries—in a difficult position.
Due to the Supreme Court’s ruling that sitting and former presidents are immune from official acts, Judge Merchan informed Trump’s lawyers that he would delay a decision on how to proceed until November 19. Trump’s attorney, Emil Bove, requested the delay, citing the need to avoid constitutional barriers to Trump’s ability to govern, and prosecutors in Bragg’s office ultimately agreed. Trump was scheduled to be sentenced Nov. 26, but his resounding election victory puts the entire case in the spotlight and Merchan in a bind.
The hush money case loomed over Trump’s campaign, particularly after a Manhattan jury convicted him in May for falsifying business documents to conceal a $130,000 payment to Stormy Daniels. Bragg’s attorneys argued the payment should have been reported as a political expense, though the Federal Election Commission had previously determined it was not an in-kind contribution.
One month after the verdict, the Supreme Court ruled that presidents cannot be criminally charged for official acts. Trump’s legal team argues that his authorization of the payment from the Oval Office qualifies as such. The defense also criticized testimony from Michael Cohen, a convicted liar and felon, as well as evidence that was incorrectly provided to the jury. Prosecutors countered, stating that only a “sliver” of the evidence in their case was in dispute, but they also took testimony from former Trump administration officials like Hope Hicks.
Cohen testified that he made the payment personally and was later reimbursed by Trump, though the payment occurred while Trump was a private citizen. Cohen claimed that discussions about the reimbursement continued from the Oval Office. Despite questions about whether the payment made shortly after Cohen’s transaction with Daniels could be considered an official act, legal observers suggest it is likely that a court will intervene to prevent the spectacle of an incoming president facing prison time.