Former President Donald Trump’s lawyers were busy this week with new developments in three of Trump’s ongoing court cases, all of which had been dormant for several weeks.
On Friday afternoon Judge Juan Merchan, the judge overseeing Trump’s hush money case, rescheduled his sentencing for Nov. 26. Trump, the Republican presidential nominee, was previously scheduled for sentencing on Sept. 18. Similarly, Judge Tanya Chutkan, the judge overseeing Trump’s election subversion case, delayed setting a trial date until after Oct. 29.
Here’s what to know about this week’s developments:
The Hush Money Case
– What’s New: Merchan delayed sentencing Trump for his felony convictions until after the presidential election. The new sentencing date is set for Nov. 26. The decision is a win for Trump’s team, which requested the delay.
READ: Trump to plead not guilty to charges in revised election indictment
– Background: A jury in May found Trump guilty of 34 felony counts of falsifying business documents to conceal payments meant to silence stories of an extramarital sexual encounter. It was an elaborate “catch and kill” scheme carried out during his 2016 presidential campaign in a bid to influence the election. Merchan originally set Trump’s sentencing date for July 11 but early that month postponed it until Sept. 18. Merchan’s delay allowed him to weigh the potential effect of a Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity, which found that presidents have immunity for official acts but not for unofficial acts.
– Why it Matters: Trump, the first former president convicted of felonies, faces a maximum sentence of four years. Delaying his sentencing gives Trump’s attorneys more time to prepare a challenge to the conviction, but it also prevents Trump’s attorneys from appealing the case – since appeals can’t happen before sentencing – and prevents him from potentially getting exonerated before the election.
The Election Subversion Case
– What’s New: Chutkan avoided setting a trial start date on Thursday and instead gave the defense and prosecution new deadlines to argue how the case should proceed. The prosecution has until Sept. 26 to file a brief on why the indictment should continue to trial. The defense has until Oct. 17 to reply, and the prosecution has until Oct. 29 to respond to the defense.
– Background: Trump in August 2023 was charged with one count of conspiracy to defraud the United States, one count of conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, one count of obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding, and one count of conspiracy against rights. Prosecutors said Trump tried to overturn the results of his 2020 election loss and undermine American democracy. The trial was initially set to begin on March 4 but was delayed until the Supreme Court court could rule on presidential immunity. The Supreme Court after its presidential immunity ruling in July tasked Chutkan with deciding which charges could proceed to trial and which would be thrown out. Prosecutors in an effort to better comply with the Supreme Court ruling filed a revised indictment last week that still included the four original counts but removed allegations that Trump pressured the Department of Justice to do his bidding.
READ: Trump to plead not guilty to charges in revised election indictment
– Why it Matters: The judge’s deadlines all but guarantee that Trump won’t see trial before Election Day on Nov. 5 and likely not before 2025. However, the prosecution’s brief will likely include evidence that has not yet been made public and was reserved for the trial.
READ: Trump to plead not guilty to charges in revised election indictment
The E. Jean Carroll Case
– What’s New: Trump was present in the courtroom Friday when his attorneys asked an appeals court to overturn the $5 million verdict that found him liable for sexually assaulting and defaming the writer E. Jean Carroll. They did not issue a decision.
– Background: A jury in 2023 found Trump liable in a civil sexual assault and defamation case surrounding an encounter that Carroll said occurred in the 1990s and a Truth Social post in 2022 in which he called Carroll’s claim a hoax. Jurors awarded Carroll $2.02 million for her sexual assault claim and $2.98 million for her defamation claim. A separate jury earlier this year ordered Trump to pay Carroll $83.3 million for defamation and damage to her reputation after she first accused him of rape in June 2019. Trump, who has denied an encounter with Carroll ever took place, is also appealing that verdict.
– Why it Matters: Though the civil case holds less political weight than the other criminal cases, it provides Vice President Kamala Harris the ammunition to continue portraying Trump as a criminal and predator. If the appeals court overturns the verdict, it could cast doubt on the accusations from Harris and further Trump’s claims that he is a victim of a corrupt justice system.
Leave a Reply