Hush money process - Trump sentence in New York not planned until September
I'm a New York legal process concerning payment settlements from Ex-President Donald Trump is delayed, with the announcement of the sentence set for September 18. This new date emerged from a letter to the parties involved in the process, with Judge Juan Merchan adding "if this is still necessary." This allows Trump's attorneys sufficient time to process their request to vacate the judgment.
Background for the delay is a Supreme Court ruling in the United States regarding presidential immunity. In this ruling, it states that US presidents enjoy extensive protection from prosecution for official actions in office. Trump's move was anticipated, but he is not given the greatest chance due to the New York case focusing on actions that occurred prior to his presidency.
A jury in New York found Trump guilty of 34 charges a few weeks ago, in a process concerning the illegal hush money payments to a porn star. This marked the first time in US history that a former president was indicted for a criminal offense. Trump could potentially face a multi-year prison sentence.
Biden sees "dangerous precedent"
Trump's success at the highest US court is significant: The Supreme Court ruled that he does not enjoy complete immunity for actions during his presidency, but the protection from prosecution is quite extensive. US President Joe Biden spoke about the Supreme Court decision as a "dangerous precedent."
You want to know everything about the US election?
The stern team on site keeps you informed every Saturday in the free newsletter "Inside America" about the most important developments and provides insights into how Americans really look at their country. After submitting your email address, you will receive a confirmation email. We handle your data confidentially. By making this decision, the judges further delay the start of the election fraud trial against the 78-year-old in Washington, D.C. A lower court now needs to determine for which actions Trump's immunity applies. It is considered highly unlikely that the process in Washington will begin before the US presidential election in November.
Legal disputes may last a long time
The New York case is different from, for example, the election fraud proceedings in Washington. The New York case primarily revolved around Trump's actions as a presidential candidate before the 2016 election. Trump had already failed in the past using the argument that the case concerned his presidency.
However, Trump's attorneys could argue that the indictment in this case was based on evidence from Trump's time in the White House. Since the Supreme Court decided that official actions of US presidents are not only protected from prosecution but also cannot be used as evidence in criminal proceedings, this issue may arise in an appeal. Trump had already announced that he would appeal against the judgment.
Biden: "The only limits are set by the president himself"
Biden commented on the Supreme Court decision as a "dangerous precedent."
US-President Biden criticized the Supreme Court's immunity ruling and warned of serious consequences. "Today's decision means with near certainty that there will be practically no limits for the actions of a President," said the Democrat during a hastily arranged speech at the White House. Every President, including Trump, will now have the freedom to ignore the law, warned the 81-year-old. He intends to run against Trump in the November presidential election.
The Supreme Court has created a "fundamentally new principle" with its decision: The power of the Presidency will no longer be limited by laws or the Supreme Court, Biden warned. "The only limits will be set by the President himself." The people in the US have a right to receive a court response regarding Trump's role in the Capitol riot on January 6, 2021 before the upcoming presidential elections in November. This response will likely no longer be possible after the ruling.
Biden, who is in a critical phase of his campaign following a disastrous TV debate performance in the previous week, used the opportunity to call on people to vote. He did not answer questions about his candidacy.
Liberal Justices express "fear for our democracy"
The Supreme Court's decision was made with a six to three majority. The three justices perceived as liberal did not align with the Supreme Court's conservative majority, which Trump solidified through personnel decisions during his presidency. In the dissenting opinion written by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the justices expressed their "fear for our democracy."
Sotomayor outlined potential scenarios in which the President's immunity from prosecution could apply in the future - as an example, she mentioned a murder plot ordered by him against a rival, a military coup by an ousted President, or evidence of bribery.
"Even if these nightmare scenarios never materialize, and I pray they never do, the damage has already been done," Sotomayor wrote. "In every exercise of his office, the President is now a king, above the law." The long-term consequences of the decision are significant. The Court is effectively creating a lawless zone around the President and shaking the status quo, which has existed since the founding of the nation.
- Despite the delay in his New York legal process due to a Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity, former US President Donald Trump's legal team is seeking to vacate the judgment against him.
- Following Donald Trump's indictment on 34 charges related to illegal hush money payments, US President Joe Biden expressed concern about the "dangerous precedent" set by the Supreme Court's decision on presidential immunity.
- The Supreme Court's ruling on presidential immunity, which upheld extensive protection for US presidents from prosecution for official actions in office, has attracted criticism from Democrats, including President Biden.
- The Supreme Court's decision to provide extensive protection to US presidents from prosecution for official actions in office has been welcomed by Donald Trump's supporters, who argue that the ruling safeguards the presidential office from political persecution.
- The Supreme Court's ruling on presidential immunity has raised concerns in some quarters about the potential for future US presidents to exercise near-unlimited power, immune from legal accountability for their actions.
