Judge orders Trump to be sentenced on Jan. 10 in hush-money case
The judge overseeing the criminal case against Donald Trump in his home state of New York has ordered the president-elect to appear before him on January 10 to be sentenced on the 34 felony counts he was convicted of last year.
In a stunning, 18-page ruling released on Friday, Acting Justice Juan Merchan said he would not sentence Trump to a term of incarceration but would instead impose “a sentence of unconditional discharge” — meaning a sentence of no jail time, probation or fines — as “the most viable solution” and permit Trump to continue to appeal the case.
Sentencing, which Trump’s lawyers tried to fight on the grounds of immunity, will occur just 10 days before the president-elect is inaugurated.
A jury of 12 New Yorkers found Trump guilty on 34 counts of falsifying business records in May after a six-week-long trial.
Prosecutors said Trump covered up hush-money payments that he made to adult film star Stormy Daniels ahead of the 2016 election to buy her silence over a story about an alleged affair. Trump’s former lawyer, Michael Cohen, paid Daniels, and then the president-elect reimbursed him over several months, recording the payments as “legal expenses”
Trump denied all wrongdoing as well as the affair with Daniels.
Sentencing in the New York criminal trial was originally supposed to take place in July but it was postponed until September after the Supreme Court issued a decision on presidential immunity, which awarded presidents immunity from criminal prosecution so long as a potential crime was committed under an “official act” while in office.
Then, sentencing was indefinitely postponed after the 2024 presidential election, giving the defense and prosecution time to weigh in on how the case should be handled.
Justice Merchan said that the Supreme Court’s decision on presidential immunity for sitting presidents does not preclude him from sentencing — an argument Trump’s lawyers tried to make. Citing precedent, Justice Merchan said president-elects are private citizens with no ability to take “official actions.”
Continuing, he said that the threat of “public stigma” from prosecution against Trump “has long passed,” citing Trump’s own arguments that courts should “defer to the will of the cinzenry who recendy re-elected him to the Office of the Executive, norwithstanding an actual guilty verdict in this case.”
“Thus, whatever stigma that might have existed, will most certainly not interfere with Defendant’s ability to carry out his duties — both as President-elect and as the sitting President,” he said.
Justice Merchan noted that Trump had asked for the sentencing to be put on hold until after the election and called the claim that his win in that election changed the circumstances of the case “disingenuous.”
“Defendant has always pronounced, since the inception of this case, confidence and indeed the expectation, that he would prevail in the 2024 Election — confidence that has proven well-founded. That he would become the ‘President-elect’ and be required to assume all the responsibilities that come with the transition were entirely anticipated. Thus, it was fau for this Court to trust that his request to adjourn sentencing until after the election carried with it the implied consent that he would face sentence during the window between the election and the taking of the oath of office,” he wrote.
In ordering Trump to appear — either in-person or virtually — for sentencing, Merchan said the need to respect the jury’s verdict against the former president turned president-elect makes it even more important that Trump be sentenced on the charges on which he’s been found guilty.
He wrote that “the sanctity of a jury verdict and the deference that must be accorded to it” is “a bedrock principle” of American jurisprudence.
The conviction initially held the possibility that Trump could serve up to four years in jail or thousands of dollars in fines.
Steven Cheung, Trump’s communications director, said in a statement that Justice Merchan’s sentencing order “deeply conflicted” and a “direct violation” of the Supreme Court’s immunity deicsion. He indicated Trump would fight sentencing.
“This lawless case should have never been brought and the Constitution demands that it be immediately dismissed,” Cheung said.
