Former President Donald Trump has asked a federal appeals court for a stay that would delay the sentencing in his New York hush-money case, which is scheduled for Sept. 18.
The longshot attempt to delay the sentencing comes one day after District Judge Alvin Hellerstein denied Trump’s bid to move his criminal case to federal court.
In a 28-page filing late Wednesday, Trump’s attorneys asked the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit to stay Judge Hellerstein’s order — a move that would delay Trump’s criminal case, including his sentencing, from moving forward.
“Absent the requested stay, President Trump and the American people will suffer irreparable harm,” defense attorneys Emil Bove and Todd Blanche wrote.
Trump’s lawyers claimed in the appeal that the former president’s case belongs in federal court because the allegations and evidence in the case relate to Trump’s official acts as president — an argument defense attorneys said was bolstered by the Supreme Court’s recent ruling on presidential immunity.
Fox News’ Sean Hannity hosts Republican presidential candidate former President Donald Trump for a town hall event on September 4, 2024, in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, United States. (Photo by Selcuk Acar/Anadolu via Getty Images)
Selcuk Acar/Anadolu via Getty Images
In their filing, defense attorneys emphasized the “irreparable harm” of allowing the sentencing to proceed because it could result in Trump’s “unconstitutional incarceration while the 2024 Presidential election is imminent.”
“Unlawfully incarcerating President Trump in the final weeks of the Presidential election, while early voting is ongoing, would irreparably harm the First Amendment rights of President Trump and voters located far beyond New York County,” defense attorneys wrote.
Trump made a similar argument unsuccessfully to Hellerstein, and legal experts generally agree that Trump will not have to serve whatever sentence he receives until after the election.
Later this week, a panel of judges on the same federal appeals court is set to consider Trump’s appeal of a 2023 civil judgment holding him liable for sexual abuse of columnist E. Jean Carroll and awarding her $5 million in damages.
Former President Donald Trump is seeking a delay in the sentencing of his hush money case from a federal appeals court. The case, which involves payments made to two women who claimed to have had affairs with Trump, has been a source of legal trouble for the former president since before he took office.
The hush money payments were made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels and former Playboy model Karen McDougal in the weeks leading up to the 2016 presidential election. Trump’s former lawyer, Michael Cohen, pleaded guilty to campaign finance violations in connection with the payments and implicated Trump in the scheme.
In December 2018, federal prosecutors in New York charged Cohen with multiple crimes, including campaign finance violations, and he was sentenced to three years in prison. Trump was identified as “Individual-1” in court documents related to the case, but he was not charged with any crimes.
Now, Trump is asking the federal appeals court to delay the sentencing in the case, citing concerns about potential conflicts of interest on the part of the judge who oversaw the trial. Trump’s lawyers argue that Judge William Pauley III should have recused himself from the case because he had a personal relationship with one of the prosecutors involved in the investigation.
The delay request comes as Trump continues to face legal challenges on multiple fronts, including investigations into his business practices and tax returns. The hush money case is just one of many legal battles that Trump is currently fighting, and it remains to be seen how the federal appeals court will rule on his request for a delay in sentencing.
In the meantime, Trump’s legal team is working to mount a defense against the charges in the hush money case, arguing that the payments were made for personal reasons and not to influence the outcome of the election. The outcome of the case could have significant implications for Trump’s future legal troubles and political ambitions.
