The New York judge in President-elect Donald Trump’s criminal hush money case ruled Monday that the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity decision does not apply to that case.
Trump had sought to dismiss his criminal indictment and vacate the jury verdict on the grounds that prosecutors, during the trial last May, introduced evidence relating to Trump’s official acts as president, after the Supreme Court later ruled in July that Trump is entitled to presumptive immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts undertaken while in office.
However, Judge Juan Merchan said on Monday that the evidence in Trump’s hush money case related “entirely to unofficial conduct” and “poses no danger of intrusion on the authority and function of the Executive Branch.”
Trump was found guilty in May on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records related to a hush money payment made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels in order to boost his electoral prospects in the 2016 presidential election. Judge Merchan has yet to hand down a sentence.
In his ruling Monday, Merchan found that there was “overwhelming evidence of guilt” that led the jury to convict Trump at trial.
Trump’s attorneys, arguing for immunity, had emphasized the importance of former White House Communications Director Hope Hicks’ testimony, including her recounting of interactions with Trump in 2018 when reporting about the alleged hush money payment to Stormy Daniels broke, to demonstrate Trump’s knowledge of the payment and his preference that the story came out after the election.
