(Bloomberg) -- Donald Trump is intensifying efforts to halt his sentencing in the New York hush money case before the the November presidential election, and prosecutors are pushing back.
The former president filed a last-minute bid to move the case to federal court last week on top of two separate requests to delay the sentencing in state court. Judges could rule on all three requests as soon as this week as the Sept. 18 sentencing date looms.
Trump has asked New York state court Justice Juan Merchan to put the case on hold while his attempt to move the matter to federal court plays out. But in a response on Tuesday, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office said “federal law is clear” that no such delay is warranted, and that a previous attempt to move the case before trial was shot down.
The back-and-forth is the latest sign that Trump is pulling out all the stops to avoid being sentenced as he campaigns to return to the White House in the Nov. 5 presidential election. The 78-year-old billionaire faces as long as four years behind bars in the hush money case, though a far shorter sentence or even probation is also possible.
A Manhattan jury on May 30 found Trump guilty of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to conceal a $130,000 payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels. Trump’s opponent, Vice President Kamala Harris, has seized on the case to portray the election as a choice between a former prosecutor and a “convicted felon.”
The latest potential delay arose last week after the former president asked US District Judge Alvin Hellerstein in Manhattan to take over the case. Trump argued that only a federal judge can decide whether the hush money trial was impacted by the July 1 landmark US Supreme Court ruling that former presidents have at least some immunity from prosecution for official acts in office.
Barbara McQuade, a former federal prosecutor and guest columnist for Bloomberg Opinion, said Trump’s attempt to move the case to federal court is likely to fail.
“State courts can apply immunity just as well as federal courts,” she said. “It is not a basis for removal because the conduct occurred while Trump was a private citizen, not president.”
The initial filing to Hellerstein last week was rejected by the court for technical reasons, forcing Trump’s team to refile the motion Tuesday.
Hellerstein is the judge who rejected Trump’s bid to transfer the case to federal court in 2023, before the trial took place. If the judge makes the same decision now, it will likely set up a series of appeals, potentially all the way to the US Supreme Court.
Merchan had already been expected to rule this week on a previous motion to push back the sentencing based on the immunity ruling. The new motions in state and federal court doubled down on the strategy by asking Merchan to postpone sentencing indefinitely — effectively putting the case on hold — until there is a ruling on the issue in federal court.
In Tuesday’s letter, prosecutors said Trump himself is to blame for the timing of the sentencing. “We note that the concerns defendant expresses about timing are a function of his own strategic and dilatory litigation tactics,” Bragg’s team said.
If Trump’s request to put the case on hold is denied, Merchan will still have several decisions to make. He’s due to rule at any time on Trump’s earlier request to delay sentencing until after the election. Trump had argued that going ahead with sentencing before Nov. 5 amounted to “election interference.”
Merchan has also said he’ll rule Sept. 16 on Trump’s request to vacate the verdict. Trump has argued the conviction should be tossed out because the trial was tainted by testimony and other evidence that wouldn’t have been allowed under the Supreme Court’s new standard on presidential immunity.
If those efforts fail, Trump’s sentencing will go ahead as planned on Sept. 18.
(Adds outside comment in sixth paragraph)
©2024 Bloomberg L.P.
