Trump’s New York sentencing likely delayed while he tries to toss conviction after immunity ruling

NEW YORK — Donald Trump’s sentencing in his Manhattan criminal trial is likely to be delayed while Trump argues that his conviction should be tossed out in light of Monday’s Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity.

Manhattan prosecutors said they don’t oppose delaying the July 11 sentencing date so that Trump can submit new arguments stemming from the immunity ruling.

In a letter Tuesday, prosecutors told Justice Juan Merchan that they believe Trump’s arguments will be “without merit,” but they nonetheless consent to Trump’s request to submit court filings related to the immunity decision.

If Merchan agrees to delay the sentencing, it wouldn’t occur before July 24, according to a schedule proposed by prosecutors and Trump’s lawyers.

On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled that former presidents have “absolute” immunity from criminal prosecution over actions that fall within their “core constitutional powers,” and that they are also entitled to immunity for many other “official” acts.

Though the ruling came as a result of special counsel Jack Smith’s prosecution of the former president for trying to overturn the 2020 presidential election, Trump’s effort to apply it to the Manhattan case demonstrates the influence the decision may have on his other criminal prosecutions.

In the Manhattan case, Trump was convicted in May on 34 counts of falsifying business records to cover up a hush money payment to a porn star. He directed the payment of the hush money in October 2016, before he was elected president. But he falsified the records while he was in office, and during the trial, prosecutors introduced other evidence about Trump’s conduct during his presidency.

Trump’s lawyers argued in a letter to Merchan that prosecutors should have been precluded from using evidence related to his official acts.

In light of the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling, defense lawyers Todd Blanche and Emil Bove wrote, “it will be manifest that the trial result cannot stand.”

Before the trial began in mid April, Trump’s defense team asked Merchan to bar prosecutors from using evidence of Trump’s “official acts” and asked the judge to delay the start of the trial, arguing that the then-pending Supreme Court case concerning presidential immunity could affect the Manhattan case.

Merchan denied those requests , saying they were “untimely” and could have been raised months earlier. He added that “the Court declines to consider whether the doctrine of presidential immunity precludes the introduction of evidence of purported official presidential acts in a criminal proceeding.”