President-elect Donald Trump has petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to halt his criminal sentencing scheduled for this Friday in a case stemming from hush money payments. In a detailed 40-page filing drafted by John Sauer, Trump’s nominee for solicitor general, Trump’s motion seeks to pause proceedings to allow an appeal, arguing that the upcoming sentencing imposes a “burden” on his ability to prepare for his impending presidency.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor has requested that prosecutors respond to Trump’s filing by Thursday morning. While Trump was found guilty of 34 counts related to falsifying business records to conceal payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels, Judge Juan Merchan, overseeing the case, has signaled his intent to impose an “unconditional discharge,” sparing Trump any serious legal penalty.
Arguing for dismissal, Trump claims his status as a president-elect provides immunity and labels the charges as politically charged. He draws attention to a previous Supreme Court decision, Trump v. United States, as a basis for postponing state court proceedings while addressing presidential immunity claims.
Judge Merchan recently turned down Trump’s plea to defer his ruling, reinforcing his intention to speedily resolve what remains of the judicial proceedings. He further indicated willingness to permit Trump a virtual appearance to mitigate concerns over his presidential transition responsibilities.
This urging for intervention by the Supreme Court follows a recent denial from a state appeals judge regarding the postponement of sentencing scheduled for January 10. Trump continues to pursue relief concurrently from the New York Court of Appeals.
Trump contests the use of his social media posts as evidence against him, contending it conflicts with earlier court interpretations about official acts. Despite claiming an electoral “landslide victory,” political analysis notes his win was by a modest popular vote margin and described as average in terms of the electoral college outcome, with CNN contextualizing the results as in the “lower half” of historic U.S. presidential outcomes.
His appeal insists that claims of presidential immunity warrant immediate appeal rights and accompanying stays in trial court activities pending judicial consideration, a stance his legal team argues the Supreme Court’s past rulings inherently support.
Further coverage can be found in the original report at Howe on the Court.