Prosecutors open to delaying Trump’s sentencing in hush money case

New York prosecutors say they are opposed to dismissing United States President-elect Donald Trump’s hush money case but have expressed openness to delaying his sentencing until after his second term.
In a court filing Tuesday, the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office argued that Trump’s forthcoming presidency does not warrant dismissing a case that has already gone through the courts. However, “given the need to balance competing constitutional interests”, prosecutors said that “consideration must be given” to possibly pumping the brakes on the case until Trump exits office again.
The case has long been plagued by delays. Last week, Judge Juan Merchan delayed ruling on Trump’s previous efforts to overturn his conviction related to a July ruling by the US Supreme Court, which allows a president’s immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts in office.
It is unclear when the judge could rule on the matter. He could opt to delay the case for an undisclosed period of time or wait to see how a federal appeals court rules on Trump’s simultaneous attempts to move the case out of state court.
In Tuesday’s court filing, prosecutors argued that “no current law establishes that a president’s temporary immunity from prosecution requires the dismissal of a post-trial criminal proceeding that was initiated at a time when the defendant was not immune from criminal prosecution and that’s based on unofficial conduct for which the defendant is also not immune”.
Prosecutors stressed the need to “proceed in a manner that preserves both the independence of the Executive and the integrity of the criminal justice system”.
Trump was found guilty on all counts in May of falsifying business records in a historic trial, becoming the first US president in history to be charged and convicted of a crime. The reality star billionaire had faced 34 felony counts of falsifying business documents tied to a $130,000 hush money payment made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels in the run-up to the 2016 US presidential election.
A possible dismissal of the case would automatically dispose of Trump’s criminal record and a potential prison term.
Trump’s sentencing had been set for November 26. Following his victory in the November 5 presidential election, Trump’s lawyers pressed Merchan to toss it. They argued the case must be thrown out “to facilitate the orderly transition of executive power — and in the interests of justice”.
On Tuesday, the incoming White House communications director, Steven Cheung, blasted prosecutors’ latest filing as a major win for Trump.
“This is a total and definitive victory for President Trump and the American People who elected him in a landslide,” Cheung said in a statement, cited by The Associated Press. “President Trump’s legal team is moving to get it dismissed once and for all.”
Prosecutors say Trump engaged in the hush money scheme with former lawyer-fixer Michael Cohen to facilitate a payment to Daniels to buy her silence regarding a tryst a decade earlier. Trump, who later paid Cohen back, recorded the payments as legal expenses in an effort to obscure their true nature, according to prosecutors.
Trump has pledged to appeal the verdict if the case is not dismissed. He has long denied any wrongdoing or that he had sexual relations with Daniels. He called the verdict against him “rigged” and “disgraceful”, singling out the efforts of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg as part of a vengeful “witch-hunt” bent on smearing his campaign.
Al Jazeera has reached out to Bragg’s office for comment.
Some legal analysts, however, say prosecutors could face an uphill battle in ultimately securing a sentence against Trump.
David Shapiro, a lecturer at New York’s John Jay College of Criminal Justice and a financial crimes expert, said he was not surprised by prosecutors’ latest filing, noting that Bragg’s office had assumed a “risk-averse” posture in pushing back against Trump’s legal teams’ efforts to dismiss the case. He highlighted, however, the highly unusual legal scenario of delaying a potential sentencing until 2029, when Trump leaves office.
“It’s unprecedented,” Shapiro told Al Jazeera.
“The idea that this matter should be postponed until the end of the president’s term – it does not strike me as a just resolution,” Shapiro said. “I think the best outcome of this war for justice is for somebody to make a decision to make it final.”
Shapiro laid out several possible legal routes Merchan could take in the coming days and weeks.
“One, the judge can say, ‘I’m sentencing you. This doesn’t involve any immunity issues. We’re going to sentence you before you’re inaugurated.’”
Shapiro said he could also see the presiding judge issuing an unconditional discharge in the matter, instead of officially sentencing Trump, a pathway which he deemed more likely. Trump’s guilty verdict would effectively stand, but he would not face any type of prison sentence or fines.
“That way, everybody saves face,” Shapiro explained. “Mr Trump can appeal it, and whatever. The prosecutors save face. The judge saves face. And the United States is not harmed by an impaired president.”
The hush money trial is one of four criminal indictments Trump has faced following the end of his first term in office, all of which are currently in limbo following this month’s presidential election.
Special Counsel Jack Smith is in the midst of closing two of his open cases against Trump, which involve Trump’s alleged involvement in overturning the 2020 election and separate accusations that he stashed troves of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate.
Another case in Georgia involving allegations of state election interference there is also paused. That trial had yielded the first-ever mugshot of a former president, which Trump ultimately used as a marketing tool to boost his campaign during the presidential cycle.