Judge Merchan faces the task of applying the Supreme Court's immunity ruling.--2 key questions.........

[riversedge]

Lots of information included. I will read sometime later...


Following Supreme Court ruling, what happens next in Trump's criminal hush money case?

Judge Merchan faces the task of applying the Supreme Court's immunity ruling.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/supreme-court-ruling-trumps-criminal-hush-money-case/story?id=111625803&cid=social_twitter_abcn


By Peter Charalambous July 3, 2024, 4:04 AM


With Donald Trump's sentencing in his New York hush money case delayed until September following Tuesday's decision by Judge Juan Merchan, the judge now faces the task of applying the Supreme Court's new test for the limits of presidential immunity to the former president's criminal conviction.

Trump in May was found guilty on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records related to a 2016 hush money payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels in order to boost his electoral prospects in the 2016 presidential election.

Trump's lawyers have argued that the judge should "set aside" the jury's verdict in the case because the jury heard evidence during the trial that would have been protected by presidential immunity, based on Monday's ruling by the Supreme Court that Trump is entitled to "at least presumptive immunity" from criminal prosecution for official acts taken while in office.
MORE: Judge in Trump's criminal hush money case postpones sentencing to Sept. 18

To rule on the defense's request -- which Judge Merchan plans to do by Sept. 6 -- he will likely have to answer two key questions, according to former federal prosecutor Jarrod Schaeffer.

The first question is, would the Supreme Court's decision have limited some of the evidence and testimony at trial?.........................................

[brush]

1. They are NY state convictions. State convictions, not federal.

[Igel]

3. And yet states are subordinate to the Constitution.

They cannot pass laws that the Constitution forbids. "Incorporation" is the fancy word for it.

[brush]

4. There's nothing unconstitutional about the state on NY finding trump guilty.

[gab13by13]

2. To answer your question

Some evidence may not be allowed, like Hope Hick's testimony in the Oval office, that evidence may now not be allowed, but it may not be needed. We still have the David Pecker evidence from the Oval office and that testimony certainly is not official business.

I believe there will be enough evidence that is allowable to sustain the conviction.