Donald Trump wants Manhattan court to hold hush money trial until Supreme Court rules on 'presidential immunity' case
Former President Donald Trump has sought to delay his upcoming trial in New York, where he faces accusations of paying hush money to a porn star.
The former president wants the Manhattan court to wait until the Supreme Court rules on his request for “presidential immunity” in another criminal case.
The trial in Manhattan will take place on March 25. The case arises from an incident that occurred before Donald Trump took office.
During that time, he allegedly paid money to a porn star to cover up a 2016 affair. The crucial information, however, relates to Trump's post-election activities.
Trump's lawyers, Todd Blanche and Susan Necheles, have asked Judge Juan Merchan to postpone the trial until the Supreme Court rules on the issue of immunity requested by the former president. They expressed concern about evidence from Trump's presidential tenure, including a 2018 “pressure campaign” targeting his former lawyer, Michael Cohen.
The lawyers argued that statements made by Trump on his official Twitter account during his presidency should be covered by presidential immunity. They fear that without such immunity, future presidents could face manipulation through the threat of prosecution by political opponents.
This is not the first time Trump has used the presidential immunity argument. He has invoked the argument in all four of his criminal cases, spanning efforts to overturn the 2020 election in Georgia to his alleged mishandling of classified documents after leaving the White House.
Legal experts said Trump's immunity claim is unlikely to succeed. However, they added that he has effectively delayed his case over the federal elections by several months.
The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on this matter on April 25 and a decision is expected in June.
The office of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, responsible for prosecuting Trump, has not commented on the request to delay the trial. Special prosecutor Jack Smith recently called his immunity argument “so totally baseless that it is difficult to understand it except as part of a strategic effort to delay the process.”
