NEW YORK — Attorneys for President-elect Donald Trump have renewed their request to a judge to dismiss the hush money charges against him, rejecting a suggestion from prosecutors to maintain the conviction by treating the case similarly to instances where a defendant has died. They dismissed this proposal as “absurd.”
The Manhattan District Attorney’s office has presented several options to Judge Juan M. Merchan to preserve the historic ruling following Trump’s request for a dismissal earlier this month. These options range from pausing the proceedings until Trump’s term concludes in 2029, agreeing that a future sentence wouldn’t involve jail time, to formally closing the case while acknowledging his conviction yet recognizing that sentencing and his appeal remain unresolved due to presidential immunity.
Trump’s legal representatives, Todd Blanche and Emil Bove, articulated on Friday that their stance remains clear: the only feasible scenario is to overturn the conviction and dismiss the indictment entirely. They emphasized that any alternative would impede the transition of power and hinder Trump’s ability to govern effectively. The Manhattan DA’s office has refrained from commenting on the ongoing legal proceedings.
The timing of Judge Merchan’s decision remains uncertain. He could either approve Trump’s dismissal motion, accept one of the prosecution’s options, await a federal appeals court ruling on Trump’s efforts to move the case out of state court, or consider a different course of action altogether. In their response, Blanche and Bove took issue with each of the prosecution’s proposals. They criticized the idea of postponing the case until after Trump’s presidency ends, arguing that it would create an “ongoing threat” as the incoming president would have to deal with the possibility of sentencing while in office.
Blanche and Bove highlighted that Trump, who is set to take office on January 20, should not have to lead the country under such pressure. They stated clearly, “President Trump will never abandon the public interest in response to these thuggish tactics” while labeling the threat of charges unconstitutional. The attorneys also dismissed suggestions that a lack of jail time on presidential immunity grounds would mitigate their concerns. They explained that immunity requires the case to be dismissed entirely rather than merely limiting possible sentencing outcomes.
The legal team, who are anticipated for prominent roles in the Justice Department, expressed indignation regarding the prosecution’s unusual proposal to treat the case as though Trump were deceased, which typically occurs when a defendant passes away post-conviction and prior to the finalization of their appeals. They argued that the suggestion disregards established New York precedents while attempting to create a worrying analogy between surviving assassination attempts against Trump and imagining a deceased defendant.
Prosecutors had argued that this approach would relieve Trump from any ongoing legal burdens during his presidency while keeping intact the acknowledgement of his conviction, which was established by a jury. They recognized that presidential immunity requires adjustment during Trump’s upcoming administration but insisted that this should not nullify the jury’s ruling that occurred while he was out of office.
According to longstanding Justice Department policies, sitting presidents are shielded from criminal prosecution, a protection not afforded to other global leaders. For instance, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu faces corruption trials despite actively leading during conflicts in Lebanon and Gaza.
Trump has tirelessly worked to overturn his May 30 conviction for 34 counts of falsifying business records, linked to a $130,000 payment made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels to silence her claims of a past affair, which Trump has vehemently denied. Additionally, in a recent filing, Trump’s lawyers referenced a social media post by Senator John Fetterman that criticized the hush money case and suggested that Trump deserved a pardon, contrasting his situation with President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, who received a pardon after his conviction on tax and gun charges.
Fetterman observed that using the judiciary for political gain undermines public trust in institutions and fosters division. Trump’s conviction resides in state court, making it impossible for him to receive a presidential pardon either from Biden or himself since pardons only apply to federal offenses.
Following the election, special counsel Jack Smith wrapped up two federal cases involving Trump’s claims surrounding the 2020 election loss and alleged retention of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate. Another election interference case in Fulton County, Georgia, is largely on hold, with Trump maintaining his innocence.
Though Trump was set to be sentenced in the hush money case at the end of November, Judge Merchan paused all proceedings after Trump’s November 5 election victory, delaying the sentencing for deliberation by both the defense and prosecution regarding the next steps in the case. Merchan also postponed a decision on Trump’s earlier plea to dismiss the case based on immunity. A dismissal would clear Trump’s record of a conviction, thus avoiding the complications tied to a criminal history and potential imprisonment. He stands as the first former president to be convicted of a crime and the first to face such circumstances while campaigning for the presidency.