In November, Alvin Bragg made clear that the election in November did not matter. He would continue his effort to jail Donald Trump, even if that meant waiting until after his presidency.
Now, the judge in Trump’s highly-criticized “hush money” trial has said that he agrees.
Judge Juan Merchan rejected former President Donald Trump’s request to dismiss criminal charges in his New York trial, ruling that the evidence presented did not qualify for protection under presidential immunity. Trump’s legal team had argued that a recent Supreme Court ruling, which upheld immunity for official acts of sitting and former presidents, should apply to this case.
Trump, who was convicted earlier this year on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records, had sought to overturn the conviction. His attorneys claimed that certain evidence tied to Trump’s time as president should have been excluded based on the Supreme Court’s decision on immunity.
In his ruling, Merchan dismissed this argument, finding that the evidence presented during the trial pertained to Trump’s personal conduct, not official duties as president.
“The evidence introduced in this trial related entirely to unofficial conduct and thus receives no immunity protections,” Merchan wrote, according to Fox News. He further noted that even if the evidence were mistakenly classified as “official acts,” it would not have affected the outcome. “Such error, if it occurred, was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt,” he added.
This ruling is a major setback for Trump’s defense team, which has consistently argued that the case brought by the Manhattan District Attorney is a politically motivated attack. Trump spokesperson Steven Cheung criticized the judge’s decision, calling it “a violation of the Supreme Court’s ruling on immunity and longstanding legal precedent.” Cheung also referred to the case as part of a “witch hunt” aimed at undermining Trump’s return to the presidency.
The charges stem from a yearslong investigation into alleged hush money payments made during the 2016 presidential campaign violated campaign finance law. The case was brought forward by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, building on work originally initiated under former District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. Earlier this year, after a six-week trial, a jury unanimously found Trump guilty of falsifying business records to hide these payments.
Trump’s attorney Todd Blanche argued that trial evidence—including testimony from former White House officials and references to Trump’s communications as president—violated the Supreme Court’s doctrine on presidential immunity. Blanche claimed this evidence unfairly influenced the jury and should have been excluded.
While Merchan rejected Trump’s motion to dismiss the charges, the judge has not yet ruled on Trump’s formal request to overturn the conviction entirely. Trump’s lawyers maintain that the case is politically motivated and intended to prevent him from serving as president.
“This case would never have been brought were it not for President Trump’s political views and the threat he poses to corrupt politicians,” Trump’s legal team wrote in a previous court filing.
[Read More:
