A change in the nation’s political landscape means the judge overseeing former President Donald Trump’s criminal hush money case should be recused, defense attorneys argued in a court filing made public Thursday.
Trump is reviving a longshot effort to have Judge Juan Merchan recused from the case because of an alleged conflict between the judge’s daughter and Vice President Kamala Harris, who is now the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee.
“Your Honor’s daughter has a long-standing relationship with Harris, including work for political campaigns. She has obtained — and stands to obtain in the future — extensive financial, professional, and personal benefits from her relationship with Harris,” defense lawyers Todd Blanche and Emil Bove wrote.
Describing the vice president as Trump’s “presumptive opponent,” defense lawyers argued that Merchan’s daughter has had an “extremely beneficial working relationship” with Harris because her company was a top vendor to Harris’ 2020 presidential campaign.
This is the third time Trump’s lawyers have attempted to have Judge Merchan removed from the case. Last year, New York’s Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics determined that Merchan’s impartiality “cannot reasonably be questioned” based on his daughter’s professional work as a political consultant.
When Trump renewed his motion earlier this year, Merchan determined that defense lawyers failed to prove a conflict, describing their motion as a “series of inferences, innuendos and unsupported speculation.”
In a separate filing made public Thursday, Trump’s lawyers reiterated their argument that the case should be dismissed based on the Supreme Court’s recent landmark ruling that Trump has presumptive immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts taken while in office.
Former President Donald Trump at New York State Supreme Court in New York, on Oct. 2, 2023.
Stephanie Keith/Bloomberg via Getty Images
Last week, prosecutors pushed back against the motion by arguing that Trump’s conduct was “entirely personal” with “no relationship whatsoever to any official duty of the presidency.”
Defense lawyers responded by arguing that the introduction of evidence related to official acts at trial caused an irreparable harm that merits the case be dismissed.
“In this case, a politically motivated district attorney violated that immunity by using official-acts evidence in grand jury proceedings and at trial. Therefore, the case must be dismissed, and the jury’s verdicts must be vacated,” Trump’s lawyers wrote.
Trump was found guilty in May 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.
Judge Merchan last month postponed Trump’s July 11 sentencing to Sept. 18 so he can consider Trump’s request to toss his conviction based on the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling.
President Donald Trump has once again requested that the judge overseeing the hush money case involving adult film actress Stormy Daniels recuse himself from the proceedings. This marks the third time that Trump has made this request, citing bias and prejudice against him.
The case in question revolves around the $130,000 payment made to Daniels by Trump’s former lawyer, Michael Cohen, in exchange for her silence about an alleged affair with the president. The payment was made just days before the 2016 presidential election, raising questions about potential campaign finance violations.
Judge S. James Otero, who is presiding over the case, has already denied two previous requests from Trump to recuse himself. In his latest motion, Trump’s legal team argues that Otero’s previous rulings and statements show a clear bias against the president.
Trump’s lawyers point to Otero’s decision to dismiss a defamation lawsuit filed by Daniels against the president, as well as his comments during a hearing in which he expressed skepticism about Trump’s claims of immunity from civil lawsuits while in office. They argue that these actions demonstrate Otero’s lack of impartiality in the case.
However, legal experts say that it is highly unlikely that Otero will grant Trump’s request for recusal. Judges are generally expected to remain impartial and make decisions based on the law, rather than personal biases or opinions. Otero has already indicated that he believes he can fairly preside over the case and has denied any allegations of bias.
The hush money case has been a thorn in Trump’s side since it first came to light in early 2018. The president has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing and has accused Daniels of making false claims in order to gain publicity and financial gain.
As the legal battle continues to unfold, it remains to be seen how Otero will ultimately rule on the case. But one thing is clear: Trump’s repeated requests for the judge to recuse himself highlight the high stakes involved in this contentious and closely watched legal battle.
