Trump Hush Money Prosecutors Argue Conviction Should Stand Despite Immunity Ruling

Manhattan prosecutors who secured Donald Trump's historic criminal conviction have argued that the verdict should remain in place despite the US Supreme Court's ruling that presidents cannot face criminal charges over official acts.

In a court filing dated July 24 and made public on Thursday, the prosecutors urged a judge to reject the former US president's bid to overturn the verdict in light of the ruling. They argued that the decision had no impact on their case, which centred on hush money paid to a porn star.

"The charges in this case all involve purely personal conduct, rather than official presidential acts," prosecutors from Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's office stated.

Trump, the Republican nominee in the November 5 election, was convicted on May 30 on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to conceal his former lawyer Michael Cohen's $130,000 payment to porn star Stormy Daniels for her silence before the 2016 election regarding an alleged sexual encounter with Trump.

Trump denies any encounter with Daniels and has vowed to appeal the guilty verdict. He is the first US president, past or present, to be convicted of a crime.

Legal experts suggest that Judge Juan Merchan is unlikely to grant Trump's request to overturn the verdict, as much of the conduct in question predates Trump's 2017-2021 presidency and relates to personal matters.

However, Merchan has postponed Trump's sentencing from July 11 to September 18, less than two months before the election, to allow his lawyers the opportunity to present their case.

Two weeks ago, Trump's defence lawyers urged the judge to overturn the verdict, arguing that prosecutors relied on evidence of his official acts during the trial, which they claimed was improper given the justices' ruling.

The justices' 6-3 ruling on 1 July also stated that evidence of official acts cannot be used in a prosecution concerning private matters.

Trump's lawyers contested the introduction of evidence of Twitter posts Trump made in 2018 about Cohen, which prosecutors argued demonstrated Trump was aware that his former lawyer had paid off Daniels. Defence lawyers contended that those posts were official communications.

In their Thursday filing, prosecutors argued that Trump made the posts in his "unofficial capacity."
Trump had also objected to the testimony of two White House aides and the prosecutors' use of a financial disclosure form that referenced Trump's reimbursement to Cohen.

Prosecutors stated on Thursday that the aides testified about private matters and that the disclosure form related to Trump's private finances.

Prosecutors contended that even if Merchan finds that some of the evidence introduced at trial pertained to official acts, the verdict should stand because there was substantial other evidence of Trump's guilt.
"Harmless error cannot be a basis for overturning a verdict," prosecutors wrote.

Merchan has indicated he will rule on Trump's arguments by September 6. If the conviction is upheld, the case will proceed to sentencing. Once sentenced, Trump could formally appeal the verdict and the sentencing to a higher-level state court.

For any enquiries or information, contact ask@tlr.ae or call us on +971 52 644 3004. Follow The Law Reporters on WhatsApp Channels.