Trump’s attempt to delay the trial was based on his assertion of immunity from prosecution for actions taken during his presidency…reports Asian Lite News
A Manhattan judge has dealt a blow to former President Donald Trump’s efforts to delay his hush money trial, rejecting his request to postpone proceedings until the Supreme Court rules on his claims of presidential immunity. The decision, made by Judge Juan M. Merchan, underscores the judiciary’s insistence on adherence to procedural rules and timelines.
Trump’s attempt to delay the trial was based on his assertion of immunity from prosecution for actions taken during his presidency. His legal team argued that evidence, including social media posts, pertaining to his time in office should be excluded from the trial due to this immunity. However, Merchan deemed this argument untimely, pointing out that Trump’s lawyers had ample opportunities to raise the immunity issue earlier in the legal process.
The timing of Trump’s immunity claim, coming after the deadline for pretrial motions had passed, raised doubts about the sincerity of the defense’s motion. Merchan’s ruling highlighted the importance of procedural fairness and adherence to deadlines in the legal system.
The hush money case revolves around allegations that Trump falsified records to conceal payments to his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, who arranged to silence adult film actress Stormy Daniels about an alleged affair with Trump. Trump has denied the allegations and pleaded not guilty to the charges.
The trial’s significance extends beyond the specific charges against Trump. It represents a test of the legal principle of presidential immunity and raises questions about the limits of executive authority. Trump’s attempt to use immunity as a defense underscores the broader debate over the balance of power between the executive branch and the judiciary.
The rejection of Trump’s request for a delay is a victory for prosecutors, who have argued against any special treatment for the former president. They contend that Trump’s actions, including the alleged cover-up of the hush money payments, do not qualify as official acts protected by immunity. This stance has been supported by previous rulings in the case and by appellate courts.
