One Hurdle Remains for Trump’s Hush-Money Sentencing on September 18

Donald Trump faced another setback this week as New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan denied the former president’s third request for recusal from the ongoing hush-money case against him. In a detailed three-page ruling, Merchan dismissed Trump’s claims, stating that they consisted of “stale and unsubstantiated” arguments.

The decision leaves Trump with one remaining obstacle before his scheduled sentencing on September 18 for 34 felony counts related to falsifying business records. It also raises questions about whether Merchan will entertain Trump’s arguments regarding new immunity from prosecution, granted by a recent ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court that claims former presidents cannot be prosecuted for official acts.

Merchan’s ruling asserted that Trump had provided no new evidence or arguments that would warrant his withdrawal from the case. The judge noted, “Defendant has provided nothing new for this court to consider.” This statement underscores the ongoing legal difficulties Trump faces as he strives to mount a defense before his upcoming sentencing.

Manhattan prosecutors maintain that the Supreme Court’s recent opinion should not affect the hush-money case, emphasizing that the charges hinge on Trump’s personal conduct rather than any actions tied to his official duties as president. During Trump’s initial campaign for president, he allegedly conspired with other executives from the Trump Organization to manipulate financial records to obscurate a hush-money payment made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels. This payment was made to ensure her silence just days before the election in November 2016.

As the situation stands, Trump could face a prison sentence ranging from none to four years, although any potential sentence would almost certainly be stayed pending appeal.

Merchan’s repeated denials of Trump’s recusal requests also reflect the judge’s apparent frustration. Trump’s legal team had argued that Merchan’s impartiality was compromised due to familial connections within the political sphere, specifically mentioning that his daughter works as a political consultant for a firm that has connections to high-profile Democrats.

In his response, Merchan contended that his judicial decisions would continue to be guided solely by the evidence and the law, unfettered by political considerations. “As has been the standard throughout the pendency of this case, this court will continue to base its rulings on the evidence and the law, without fear or favor, casting aside undue influence,” he affirmed. He further criticized the legal counsel for “repeating arguments that have already been denied by this and higher courts” and deemed their references to prior affirmations ineffective.

Earlier this year, New York’s Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics also concluded that there was no conflict of interest in this case regarding Merchan’s daughter, Loren Merchan. The committee affirmed that there was no significant overlap between her work and the ongoing investigation into the hush money case.

Meanwhile, the Republican-controlled House Judiciary Committee has been probing what it describes as “politicized prosecutions” against Trump. As part of this investigation, the committee has requested documents from Loren Merchan and the consulting firm Authentic, where she works. This inquiry seeks all communications involving the firm and mentions of the hush-money case, raising further questions about potential political motivations in the prosecution.

In response, Mike Nellis, the CEO of Authentic, issued a letter to Congressman Jim Jordan, clarifying that the firm had no involvement in the judicial proceedings related to Trump’s case. This statement aimed to dispel any insinuations made by the committee that could potentially harm Authentic’s reputation and the careers of its employees.

As the legal drama unfolds, all eyes will be on Justice Merchan’s upcoming decision on September 16 regarding Trump’s immunity challenge, just days before his sentencing. This development could significantly impact the trajectory of the case and Trump’s legal strategy moving forward.

Source: Business Insider