Prosecutors are set to offer recommendations to a judge on Tuesday regarding whether to reverse President-elect Donald Trump's conviction in his hush money case. This decision comes in the wake of a significant U.S. Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity. New York Judge Juan M. Merchan, who presided over the trial, had been scheduled to make a ruling last week. The ruling was expected to address whether the former and future commander-in-chief would be sentenced as planned on November 26. Trump's team advocates for the dismissal of the case, while the prosecution requires time to assess the next steps. The court granted a one-week delay to provide their position, with the deadline set for November 19, 2024. Court papers indicate that both the defense and prosecution had requested a delay.

Trump's Conviction and the Supreme Court Ruling

In May, a jury convicted Trump of falsifying business records related to a $130,000 payment to porn actor Stormy Daniels in 2016. The payment was intended to silence her about her alleged affair with Trump. However, just over a month after the verdict, the Supreme Court ruled that ex-presidents cannot be prosecuted for actions taken during their tenure. This ruling has significant implications for Trump's case. His lawyers have cited the ruling to argue that the hush money jury received some evidence that should not have been presented, such as Trump's presidential financial disclosure form and testimony from White House aides. Prosecutors, on the other hand, dispute this, stating that the evidence in question was only a small part of their case. Trump's criminal conviction was a first for any ex-president, leaving him facing the possibility of punishment ranging from a fine or probation to up to four years in prison.

The Details of the Hush Money Case

The case centered around how Trump accounted for reimbursing his personal attorney for the Daniels payment. Michael Cohen, the attorney, initially fronted the money and later recouped it through a series of payments that Trump's company recorded as legal expenses. Trump signed most of the checks himself while in the White House. Prosecutors claim that this designation was used to conceal the true purpose of the payments and to cover up an effort to prevent voters from hearing unflattering claims about Trump during his first campaign. Trump insists that Cohen was legitimately paid for legal services and that the suppression of Daniels' story was to avoid embarrassing his family, not to influence the electorate. It is important to note that when Cohen paid Daniels in October 2016, Trump was a private citizen campaigning for president but not yet elected or sworn in. When Cohen was reimbursed, Trump was president, and Cohen testified that they discussed the repayment arrangement in the Oval Office.

Trump's Efforts to Overturn the Verdict

Trump has been fighting for months to have the verdict overturned. With his impending return to the White House, he now hopes to leverage his status to influence the outcome. Although he was tried as a private citizen, his return to the presidency could prompt a court to intervene and avoid the unprecedented situation of sentencing a former and future president. In addition to seeking to overturn the conviction, Trump has also been trying to move the case to federal court. Before the election, a federal judge repeatedly denied this move, but Trump has appealed. The legal battle continues, with the fate of Trump's hush money case hanging in the balance.