No immunity for Trump in Stormy Daniels case, judge rules

Trump hoped to invoke presidential immunity, recently granted by the Supreme Court, to overturn his conviction that arose after a trial in which he was found guilty of 34 counts of falsifying commercial documents.

However, the judge in charge of the case rejected this request, stating that Trump’s actions leading to these charges were not related to his official duties as president.

Sentencing, originally scheduled for July, was postponed twice due to the Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity over the summer, pushing the sentencing date back after the election.

In his 41-page decision, Judge Juan Merchan ruled that it was “logical and reasonable” to consider the falsification of documents as an unofficial act.

The documents were intended to conceal payments made by Trump’s ex-lawyer Michael Cohen to Stormy Daniels to hide Trump’s relationship with Daniels from the public, while Melania Trump was pregnant with their son Barron.

These accusations concern reimbursements made by Trump to his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, for a $130,000 payment made to Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election. This payment was intended to prevent the revelation of their alleged affair, which could have influenced the choice of certain voters.

Consequently, communications aimed at continuing this cover-up must also be considered unofficial. In his findings, Judge Merchan asserts that there was “overwhelming evidence of guilt” in the accusations against Trump.

He adds that even if an error had been made regarding the introduction of the disputed evidence, it would be inconsequential in light of the totality of the evidence presented.

Trump’s lawyers argue that Merchan’s decision is a direct violation of the Supreme Court’s ruling on immunity, as well as other long-established case law. They will likely appeal the decision.

He also reminded the lawyers that they will have to file a formal motion if they want him to consider charges of alleged juror misconduct, which they raised earlier this month since the Court cannot rule on such charges based solely on “hearsay and conjecture”.

Merchan did not, however, rule on a motion by Trump’s lawyers to overturn the conviction on the grounds that Trump had been elected president.