Trump Seeks Federal Court Intervention in 'Hush Money' Case

In a significant legal maneuver, former President Donald Trump has requested a federal court to intervene in his New York "hush money" criminal case. The move aims to overturn his felony conviction and delay his sentencing, scheduled for next month. Trump's legal team filed the request late Thursday, arguing that the historic prosecution violated his constitutional rights and contravened a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity.

Trump's lawyers, who previously failed to shift the case to federal court, assert that moving the case now would provide an "unbiased forum, free from local hostilities" to address these issues. They claim that in state court, Trump has been subjected to "bias, conflicts of interest, and appearances of impropriety."

If the case is transferred to federal court, Trump's legal team plans to seek the overturning of the verdict and the dismissal of the case on immunity grounds. They argue that proceeding with sentencing on September 18, just seven weeks before Election Day, would constitute election interference. This timing could potentially see Trump sent to jail as early voting begins.

The request will be decided by the same Manhattan federal judge who previously rejected Trump's bid to move the case. Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein had ruled last year that the allegations in the hush money indictment were not related to Trump's official duties as president.

Trump's lawyers, Todd Blanche and Emil Bove, stated in a 64-page filing that the ongoing proceedings would cause "direct and irreparable harm" to Trump, the leading candidate in the 2024 presidential election, and voters across the country.

The Manhattan District Attorney's Office, which prosecuted the case, declined to comment. A message seeking comment was left with a spokesperson for New York's state court system.

Trump was convicted in May of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records related to concealing a $130,000 hush money payment to porn actor Stormy Daniels. The payment was intended to silence Daniels' allegations of an affair that threatened to disrupt Trump's 2016 presidential run. Trump's former lawyer, Michael Cohen, paid Daniels and was later reimbursed by Trump, whose company logged the reimbursements as legal expenses. Trump maintains that the allegations are false and that the case is part of a politically motivated "witch hunt."

Falsifying business records is punishable by up to four years in prison. Other potential sentences include probation or a fine.

Even if the case remains in state court, the ensuing legal wrangling could delay Trump's sentencing, providing a critical reprieve as he navigates the aftermath of his criminal conviction and the final stretch of his presidential campaign. Trump is the first ex-president to be convicted of a crime.

Separately, the trial judge, Juan M. Merchan, is considering Trump's requests to postpone sentencing until after Election Day, November 5, and to overturn the verdict and dismiss the case based on the Supreme Court's immunity decision. The high court's July 1 ruling restricts prosecutions of ex-presidents for official acts and limits the use of official acts as evidence in criminal cases.

Trump's lawyers argue that prosecutors rushed to trial instead of waiting for the Supreme Court's decision on presidential immunity. They claim that the trial was "tainted" by evidence that should not have been allowed under the ruling, such as testimony from former White House staffers about Trump's reactions to news coverage of the hush money deal and tweets he sent while president in 2018.

Trump's legal team had previously invoked presidential immunity in a failed bid to move the case to federal court. Judge Hellerstein rejected Trump's claim that the allegations involved official duties, stating that the hush money paid to an adult film star was not related to a president's official acts.

In Thursday's filing, Trump's lawyers argued that circumstances had changed since their initial attempt to move the case. They cited testimony from Cohen about Trump's potential use of pardon power and his response to various investigations into his conduct, all of which they claim relate to his actions as president.

Blanche and Bove also reiterated their claims that Judge Merchan has treated Trump unfairly because Merchan's daughter is a Democratic political consultant. They argued that the judge is wrongly muzzling Trump with a gag order that remains in place after the verdict.

Merchan recently rejected Trump's latest request to step aside from the case, stating that Trump's demand was a rehash "rife with inaccuracies and unsubstantiated claims" about his ability to remain impartial. A state appeals court recently upheld the gag order.

Blanche and Bove stated that Merchan "is poised to incarcerate President Trump in the final weeks of the campaign, and he has maintained an unwarranted and unconstitutional prior restraint on President Trump's ability to respond to political attacks by criticizing the New York County proceedings."

The outcome of this legal maneuver will have significant implications for Trump's presidential campaign and the broader political landscape as the nation approaches Election Day.