Alvin Bragg’s Tactics in Delaying Trump’s Sentencing Explored

Scales of justice in an empty courtroom.

Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg opposes dismissing Trump’s hush money conviction but may delay sentencing.

At a Glance

  • Alvin Bragg opposes Trump’s motion to dismiss his 34-count felony conviction in New York
  • Bragg is open to pausing proceedings pending the judge’s decision on Trump’s dismissal motion
  • The case may be deferred until Trump completes his term as President
  • Trump was convicted in May for falsifying business records related to hush money payments
  • Bragg suggests balancing constitutional interests by potentially deferring criminal proceedings

Bragg’s Legal Strategy

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg is navigating a complex legal landscape as he opposes President-elect Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn his conviction on charges of falsifying business records. Trump, who was convicted on 34 counts related to hush money payments, may see his sentencing postponed as Bragg considers suspending proceedings during Trump’s upcoming presidential term.

Bragg’s strategy involves balancing the need for justice with respect for constitutional frameworks concerning presidential immunity. In a letter to Judge Juan Merchan, Bragg argued against dismissing the case outright, emphasizing that existing law does not require dismissal of a criminal proceeding initiated before a defendant gained immunity.

Constitutional Considerations

The District Attorney’s approach is influenced by the U.S. Supreme Court’s differentiation between official immunity and accountability for personal actions. Bragg’s suggested postponement of sentencing aims to calibrate justice and executive independence sensibly.

“No current law establishes that a president’s temporary immunity from prosecution requires dismissal of a post-trial criminal proceeding that was initiated at a time when the defendant was not immune from criminal prosecution and that is based on unofficial conduct for which the defendant is also not immune,” Bragg wrote in a letter to Judge Juan Merchan. “Rather, existing law suggests that the court must balance competing constitutional interests and proceed ‘in a manner that preserves both the independence of the executive and the integrity of the criminal justice system.'” – Source

Trump’s legal team is seeking dismissal based on the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity. However, the Supreme Court has previously ruled that presidents have no immunity for unofficial conduct, which complicates Trump’s defense strategy.

Potential Postponement

Bragg has indicated a willingness to pause the proceedings pending the judge’s decision on Trump’s motion to dismiss. This move reflects a careful consideration of the constitutional implications of prosecuting a sitting president.

“Given the need to balance competing constitutional interests, consideration must be given to various non-dismissal options that may address any concerns raised by the pendency of a post-trial criminal proceeding during the presidency, such as deferral of all remaining criminal proceedings until after the end of defendant’s upcoming presidential term,” Bragg wrote.

The case, which involves 34 counts of falsifying business records related to hush money payments made before the 2016 election, carries a maximum sentence of four years under New York law. However, the timeline for potential sentencing remains uncertain as legal and constitutional considerations continue to unfold.

Looking Ahead

As the legal drama continues to unfold, the outcome of this case could have significant implications for the balance of power between the presidency and the judicial system. Bragg’s approach, which seeks to respect both presidential immunity and the integrity of the criminal justice system, may set a precedent for how similar cases are handled in the future.

With Trump having won the presidential election against Kamala Harris, the possibility of the case remaining paused through his second term adds another layer of complexity to an already unprecedented legal situation. As both sides prepare their arguments, the nation watches closely to see how this delicate balance between executive power and judicial accountability will be maintained.

Sources:

  1. Bragg Won’t Drop Trump’s ‘Hush Money’ Sentencing, But May Suspend It for 4 Years
  2. Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg agrees to pause Trump ‘hush money’ sentencing — but opposes tossing case entirely

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR