Judge issues new ruling against Trump in hush money case

Judge Juan Merchan in New York State said on December 16 that the conviction of US President-elect Donald Trump for paying to silence a pornographic actress should be upheld, according to Reuters.

In a 41-page decision , Judge Merchan affirmed that "Trump's clearly personal falsification of business records does not pose a risk to the authority and function of the executive branch," according to Reuters.

Former US President Donald Trump, along with his lawyer Todd Blanche, speaks to the press as he arrives to attend a criminal hearing regarding a hush money case at the Manhattan Criminal Court in New York City on May 30.

Trump's lawyers did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Judge Merchan's new ruling.

Previously, lawyers for President-elect Trump argued that leaving the case hanging over his head during his presidency would hinder his ability to govern, according to Reuters.

Initially, Trump was scheduled to be sentenced on November 26, but Judge Mercy postponed it indefinitely until after Trump wins the 2024 US presidential election. Trump will take office as president on January 20, 2025.

In late May, Trump was indicted by a grand jury in New York on all 34 counts of falsifying business records to conceal a hush payment to a pornographic actress ahead of the 2016 election. This marks the first time a former or current U.S. president has been convicted or charged with a criminal offense. Trump's side has denied all charges.

In July, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a ruling stemming from one of two federal cases against Trump, decided that presidents are immune from prosecution relating to their official conduct and that juries cannot present evidence of official conduct in trials concerning personal conduct. This was the first time the court had recognized presidential immunity from prosecution.

Lawyers for President-elect Trump argue that the jury that convicted him in New York was shown evidence by prosecutors of his social media posts as president and heard testimony from his former aides about conversations that took place at the White House during his 2017-2021 term.

Meanwhile, prosecutors at the office of District Attorney Alvin Bragg in Manhattan (New York) countered that the Supreme Court ruling was irrelevant to the case, which they considered to involve "completely informal conduct." In its ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court did not recognize any immunity to informal conduct by a president, according to Reuters.

Source: https://thanhnien.vn/tham-phan-ra-phan-quyet-moi-bat-loi-cho-ong-trump-ve-vu-chi-tien-bit-mieng-185241217082949787.htm