Attorneys for former President Donald Trump asked the judge overseeing his New York hush money case to delay the trial while the U.S. Supreme Court weighs Trump’s presidential immunity argument — but the judge pushed back in an order made public late Monday.
Trump’s attorneys are scheduled to argue before the Supreme Count next month that he is immune from prosecution for conduct that occurred while he was in office.
In asking for a delay of his hush money trial, currently scheduled to begin March 25, Trump has not argued the charges should be dropped over the immunity claim — but that the trial be put off and prosecutors be precluded from introducing evidence.
“President Trump respectfully submits that an adjournment of the trial is appropriate to await further guidance from the Supreme Court, which should facilitate the appropriate application of the presidential immunity doctrine in this case to the evidence the People intend to offer at trial,” defense attorney Todd Blanche wrote in Monday’s court filing.
Judge Juan Merchan, however, criticized the timing of Trump’s request and ordered that the former president seek permission before making future motions before the March 25 trial date.
“Defendant does not explain the reason for the late filing, a mere two and a half weeks before jury selection is set to begin,” Merchan said in his order. He gave prosecutors until Wednesday to respond to Trump’s request for an adjournment.
Going forward, Merchan ordered that the parties need to file a one-page letter explaining and justifying any requested relief before filing a motion. After giving the opposing party one day to respond, Merchan said he would decide the request by setting a briefing schedule or considering the one-page letters as the motions themselves.
Republican presidential candidate former President Donald Trump speaks at a campaign rally, March 9, 2024, in Rome Ga.
Mike Stewart/AP
“Effective immediately, the parties are hereby directed to obtain leave of the Court before filing any additional motions prior to March 25, 2024,” Merchan wrote.
The Supreme Court announced last month that it will hear oral arguments in April on whether Trump can claim sweeping presidential immunity for actions taken while in office, after Trump asked the court to decide the matter in the face of special counsel Jack Smith’s federal election interference case against him.
In their motion filed Monday, Trump’s lawyers said prosecutors plan to introduce documents and testimony relating to a time period when Trump was in office, including statements posted to Twitter about Cohen.
“The People’s recent proffer implicates presidential immunity because President Trump was President of the United States at the time of those actions in 2018. He made at least some of the 2018 statements at issue — and potentially all of them, though it is hard to be sure in light of the People’s vague in limine description — in his official capacity as the nation’s Chief Executive,” the defense motion said.
The Manhattan district attorney’s office declined when contacted by ABC News.
Trump last April pleaded not guilty to a 34-count indictment charging him with falsifying business records in connection with a hush money payment his then-attorney Michael Cohen made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels just days before the 2016 presidential election.
In a recent development in the ongoing legal battle surrounding President Donald Trump’s alleged involvement in hush money payments to women, a judge has ruled that Trump must obtain permission before filing any further motions in the case. This decision comes after Trump’s legal team requested a delay in the trial, citing the need for more time to review evidence and prepare their defense.
The hush money trial, which centers around payments made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels and former Playboy model Karen McDougal, has been a source of controversy for the Trump administration since it first came to light. Both women claim to have had affairs with Trump and were paid hush money in exchange for their silence during the 2016 presidential campaign.
The judge’s ruling requiring Trump to seek permission before filing further motions is a significant development in the case. It signals that the court is taking a firm stance on the proceedings and is not willing to grant unnecessary delays or extensions. This decision could potentially impact the timeline of the trial and may force Trump’s legal team to expedite their preparations.
The ruling also highlights the seriousness of the allegations against Trump and the importance of a fair and timely legal process. The judge’s decision to limit Trump’s ability to file motions without permission demonstrates a commitment to ensuring that justice is served in this high-profile case.
Overall, this latest development in the hush money trial adds another layer of complexity to an already contentious legal battle. As the case continues to unfold, it will be important to closely monitor how this ruling impacts the proceedings and whether it ultimately leads to a resolution in the ongoing controversy surrounding Trump’s alleged involvement in hush money payments.
