In a turn that surprised exactly no one, a New York judge has decided to take his time mulling over whether to dismiss the hush money case against President-elect Donald Trump.
Judge Juan Merchan has scheduled a hearing for November 19, which is practically an eternity in political time, especially when the case involves a man set to step into his second term in the White House. With the clock ticking, Trump’s team is arguing that the case, if left to linger, risks infringing on his ability to govern—a claim that’s now gaining traction given the Supreme Court’s recent ruling on presidential immunity.
Trump’s attorney, Emil Bove, minced no words, pushing for a dismissal on the grounds of presidential immunity to avoid “unconstitutional impediments” to the President-elect’s capacity to do his job. That’s right: Bove is arguing that keeping Trump tied up in court could actually be unconstitutional, given his soon-to-be-official role as leader of the free world.
But in a rare twist, even Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office seems to recognize the gravity of this issue. Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo, in a rather sober-toned letter to Judge Merchan, admitted that these “unprecedented circumstances” deserve “careful consideration” before charging ahead with any next steps.
Let’s just say this is not your average court case. On one side, there’s the state-level conviction against Trump on 34 counts of falsifying business records connected to that infamous hush money payment to Stormy Daniels. On the other side, there’s Trump’s imminent return to the Oval Office, bolstered by a Supreme Court ruling that carved out broad protections for presidents when it comes to actions tied to their official duties. As Chief Justice John Roberts pointed out, the president isn’t above the law, but Congress also can’t criminalize actions essential to carrying out executive duties. So, where does a hush-money case fit in?
That’s the million-dollar (or in this case, $130,000) question. Trump’s team argues that a sitting president—especially one about to enter office—should be free from prosecution to ensure they can focus on the “core constitutional powers” of the presidency without distractions. The Supreme Court backed this view for official acts but left some wiggle room for non-official acts. So, for the Trump team, this is less about hush money and more about avoiding a circus that could get in the way of governing. And in classic Trump style, they’re fighting every step of the way.
Meanwhile, Trump’s sentencing, should the case actually go forward, is scheduled for November 26, which only adds more urgency to the decision. Suppose Merchan decides to hold his ground and push forward. In that case, we’re looking at a scenario where a sitting president-elect could potentially be sentencing—or attending sentencing hearings—in the middle of his second transition to power. That would be a spectacle for the history books, no doubt, but also one that could set dangerous precedents for future presidents.
So here we are, waiting for Merchan’s verdict on whether this case moves ahead or gets scrapped. But here’s the bigger takeaway: this case doesn’t just impact Trump—it’s testing the boundaries of executive power and laying the groundwork for what limits, if any, we want to place on our elected officials when they’re running the country. Trump’s team, with their sights set on the Supreme Court’s ruling, clearly believes that governing without legal handcuffs is essential. His opponents, meanwhile, would love nothing more than to keep him in court.
JUST IN: Judge Juan Merchan delays ruling on whether or not to dismiss Donald Trump’s guilty verdict in the hush money case.
The decision was supposed to be made today however it will be delayed until November 19.
The freeze will allow prosecutors to respond to Trump’s demand… pic.twitter.com/N3p2anxF4P
— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) November 12, 2024
Ultimately, if this case presses on, it won’t just be Trump in the hot seat—it’ll be our entire justice system, asked to define once and for all just how far presidential immunity really goes.
