President-elect Donald Trump faces another setback in his legal battles as a New York judge rules against postponing his upcoming sentencing.
According to Fox News, Associate Justice Ellen Gesmer denied Trump's motion to stay his January 10 sentencing in the New York criminal case where he was found guilty of 34 counts of falsifying business records.
The case stems from Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's successful prosecution of Trump for falsifying business records related to a $130,000 payment made to former porn star Stormy Daniels.
The payment was allegedly made to silence claims of an alleged affair with Trump in 2006 before the 2016 election. Trump's legal team had requested the verdict be vacated based on the Supreme Court's presidential immunity decision from last year.
Trump's spokesman and incoming White House communications director, Steven Cheung, expressed their position on the motion. He emphasized their belief that recent legal precedents support their case.
Trump spokesman Cheung stated:
Today, President Trump's legal team moved to stop the unlawful sentencing in the Manhattan D.A.'s Witch Hunt. The Supreme Court's historic decision on Immunity, the state constitution of New York, and other established legal precedent mandate that this meritless hoax be immediately dismissed.
The legal team's motion referenced multiple grounds for halting the sentencing, including Supreme Court decisions and New York state constitutional provisions. However, Justice Gesmer remained unconvinced by these arguments after reviewing the submitted documents and hearing extensive oral arguments.
The timing of the sentencing has drawn particular attention as it falls just days before Trump's scheduled presidential inauguration on January 20. Judge Juan Merchan had previously set the sentencing date for January 10 at 9:30 a.m.
Trump plans to attend the sentencing virtually rather than appearing in person at the Manhattan courthouse. This arrangement allows him to participate in the proceedings while managing his transition responsibilities as president-elect.
Throughout the legal proceedings, Trump has consistently maintained his innocence. He has characterized the case as an example of politically motivated lawfare, suggesting that Democrats are using the justice system to interfere with his election prospects.
The denial of Trump's motion represents a significant development in the complex intersection of legal proceedings and political transition. The case has attracted widespread attention as it involves a president-elect facing sentencing in a criminal case just days before taking office.
Trump's team continues to argue against what they view as political weaponization of the justice system. The timing of the sentencing, occurring in the narrow window between his election victory and inauguration, has intensified public interest in the case's outcome.
The matter highlights the unprecedented nature of having a president-elect face criminal sentencing so close to assuming office. This situation has raised questions about the potential impact on the upcoming presidential transition and administration.
