Manhattan DA and state AG say Trump’s criminal and civil cases in New York should not be dismissed because he’s president

By Kara Scannell, Jeremy Herb and Lauren del Valle, CNN

(CNN) — The New York attorney general and the Manhattan district attorney both said Tuesday they will not dismiss their historic cases against Donald Trump now that he’s been reelected president.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, a Democrat, argued in a filing made public Tuesday that Trump’s May conviction on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records should not be dismissed just because he’s returning to the White House. The district attorney also said it’s possible for the judge to delay sentencing until after Trump is out of office or to impose a sentence without jail time.

“President-elect immunity does not exist,” the DA’s office wrote, adding that even when Trump is president, dismissing the conviction and the indictment would be an “extreme remedy” that is unwarranted.

And the New York attorney general’s office wrote in a letter to Trump’s attorneys Tuesday that Trump’s appeal of his $454 million civil fraud judgment poses no burden to his future presidency.

Trump was already seeking to dismiss both the felony hush money conviction and the civil fraud judgment before the November election, but now that he’s returning to the White House, his lawyers are arguing the civil and criminal verdicts should both be dropped.

Both fights over Trump’s legal fate are likely to extend into Trump’s time in the White House. His initial appeal to dismiss the civil fraud case is pending in a New York appeals court, and the decision on the hush money conviction is now resting with New York Judge Juan Merchan.

The district attorney’s filing comes in response to Trump’s motion to dismiss his May conviction. In a filing last week, Trump’s attorneys argued that continuing the case is unconstitutionally threatening Trump’s presidency – and also cited President Joe Biden’s pardon of his son, Hunter Biden.

“The overwhelming evidence of defendant’s guilt and the critical importance of preserving public confidence in the criminal justice system, among many other factors, weigh heavily against dismissal,” the DA’s office wrote.

Trump spokesman Steven Cheung attacked both New York cases in statements Tuesday. He said that the Manhattan district attorney’s filing was a “pathetic attempt to salvage the remains of an unconstitutional and politically motivated hoax,” and that New York Attorney General Letitia James “should heed President Trump’s call for national unity and drop this baseless, discredited witch hunt.”

DA proposes sentencing alternatives in hush money case

Even if Merchan keeps Trump’s conviction in place, the district attorney’s office has already acknowledged that the president-elect cannot be sentenced while he’s in office, after both sides agreed to pause the case and postpone any sentencing last month.

Prosecutors said in their filing Tuesday that a delay of Trump’s sentencing until after his presidential term was “reasonable.”

The district attorney’s office proposed several alternatives to dismissing the case altogether.

Merchan could also opt to sentence Trump to no prison time or to an unconditional discharge, the district attorney’s office argued, noting that the president-elect has no prior criminal convictions and was convicted in this case of a low-level felony, where prison time is not required.

“The Court could therefore conclude that presidential immunity, while not requiring dismissal, nonetheless would require a non-incarceratory sentence in these circumstances,” the DA’s office wrote. “Such a constitutional limitation on the range of available sentences would further diminish any impact on defendant’s presidential decision- making without going so far as to discard the indictment and jury verdict altogether.”

In another scenario, prosecutors suggested the judge could take a similar approach to how courts handle a convicted felon who dies before being sentenced or appealing their conviction.

“This Court could similarly terminate the criminal proceeding by placing a notation in the record that the jury verdict removed the presumption of innocence; that defendant was never sentenced; and that his conviction was neither affirmed nor reversed on appeal because of presidential immunity,” prosecutors wrote.

Prosecutors also say if Merchan delays the sentencing until after Trump’s term, the judge could agree to limit his presentencing considerations to exclude any of Trump’s behavior while in office.

Trump’s attorneys have argued that the pending criminal proceedings could interfere with his presidential functions. They argued the district attorney’s “ridiculous suggestion that they could simply resume proceedings after President Trump leaves Office, more than a decade after they commenced their investigation in 2018, is not an option.”

Regardless of what Merchan does, his ruling is likely to be appealed by the losing side.

Trump was convicted but not sentenced before election

Trump was convicted in May on 34 counts of falsifying business records over payments to his then-lawyer Michael Cohen to reimburse a $130,000 hush money payment made to adult-film star Stormy Daniels, in order to keep her from speaking out about an alleged affair before the 2016 election. (Trump has denied the affair.)

Trump was initially scheduled to be sentenced in July, but it was postponed twice until after the election following the Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity, which had prompted Trump’s lawyers to move to vacate the conviction.

In their arguments for Merchan to toss the case, Trump’s lawyers argued that Biden’s pardon of his son was reason for the conviction to be dismissed. Since Bragg took office, he has engaged in “precisely the type of political theater” that Biden condemned, Trump’s lawyers argued.

In addition to the pardon, Trump’s lawyers noted that special counsel Jack Smith is winding down his cases against Trump, writing that Trump’s “status as President-elect and the soon-to-be sitting President is a ‘legal impediment’ to further criminal proceedings based on the Presidential immunity doctrine (established by the Supreme Court last summer) and the Supremacy Clause.”

In its filing this week, the district attorney’s office argued that the felonies Trump was convicted of involved “purely unofficial conduct, not any official presidential acts,” and the Supreme Court ruled there’s immunity doesn’t extend to a president’s unofficial acts.

Prosecutors said there are “multiple accommodations well short of dismissal” that could be made, including “a stay of proceedings during his term in office if judgment has not been entered before presidential immunity attaches.”

“Even after the inauguration, defendant’s temporary immunity as the sitting President will still not justify the extreme remedy of discarding the jury’s unanimous guilty verdict and wiping out the already-completed phases of this criminal proceeding,” prosecutors wrote.

New York AG says $454 million civil judgment does not impact Trump’s presidency

Last month, Trump’s attorney John Sauer asked James, the Democratic New York attorney general, to dismiss the $454 million civil fraud judgment against Trump following the election. In a letter to Sauer Tuesday, the New York attorney general’s office swiftly rebuffed Trump’s request.

“Presidents do not have immunity from civil lawsuits arising from unofficial conduct, and such lawsuits may proceed while the President is in office,” wrote New York’s Deputy Solicitor General Judith Vale.

Trump’s latest effort to eliminate his legal cases as he returns to the White House next month involves the civil fraud case that went to trial last year.

New York Judge Arthur Engoron found Trump and others fraudulently inflated the value of properties, including hotels and golf courses, on financial statements used to obtain favorable loan and insurance rates. He ordered Trump to pay $454 million, including interest.

Trump appealed and a decision by the appeals court could come at any time following oral arguments in September.

“The trial is over, final judgment has been rendered, and defendants’ appeal to the First Department has been fully submitted and argued. Mr. Trump’s official duties will not be impeded while awaiting the First Department’s decision,” Vale wrote. “Mr. Trump’s upcoming inauguration as the next President of the United States has no bearing on the pendency of defendants’ appeal in this action.”

This story has been updated with additional details.

The-CNN-Wire
™ & © 2024 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.