A New York judge upheld the conviction of President-elect Donald Trump on felony charges, ruling that the verdict from a jury in the hush money case remains valid even under the Supreme Court’s new test for presidential immunity. This ruling came shortly after Trump’s victory in the 2024 presidential election, in which voters chose to return him to the White House despite his ongoing legal challenges.
The decision, made by Judge Juan Merchan, addresses a key aspect of Trump’s legal battle: whether the president-elect could use his status to dismiss the case entirely. At the heart of the issue was whether certain evidence, presented by New York prosecutors during Trump’s seven-week trial, was protected under the Supreme Court’s doctrine of presidential immunity. Trump’s legal team argued that evidence such as testimony from White House aides, social media posts sent during his presidency, and his government ethics form should have been shielded from scrutiny.
Judge Merchan, however, ruled that Trump’s immunity objections had been improperly preserved, as some of the arguments had not been raised earlier in the case. Moreover, he concluded that none of the evidence in question fell under the protection of presidential immunity. In his ruling, Merchan explained, “The evidence related to the preserved claims relate entirely to unofficial conduct and thus, receive no immunity protections; and as to the claims that were unpreserved, this Court finds in the alternative, that when considered on the merits, they too are denied because they relate entirely to unofficial conduct.”
This ruling comes at a time when the Supreme Court has recently clarified the scope of presidential immunity. The Court held that former presidents enjoy absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions related to core constitutional powers. However, it also made clear that while unofficial conduct can be prosecuted, juries are not allowed to probe the motivations behind presidential decisions. The high court’s decision sets a precedent that Trump’s defense could not use to block evidence in this case.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg strongly opposed Trump’s claims, urging Judge Merchan to dismiss the arguments about immunity. Bragg contended that no evidence presented to the jury was protected by presidential immunity and emphasized that, even if immunity applied, it would not diminish the weight of “other overwhelming evidence of defendant’s guilt.” Merchan agreed with this assessment, stating that even if the immunity argument held, he would still find that the evidence used against Trump—particularly relating to falsifying business records—did not infringe upon the authority of the Executive Branch. He concluded that such acts were personal in nature, and were not related to presidential duties, which would justify their inclusion in the case.
Trump was convicted on 34 counts of falsifying business records, all related to a $130,000 hush money payment made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels just before the 2016 presidential election. The payment was intended to conceal an affair, which Trump has consistently denied. Prosecutors argued that the scheme was a deliberate attempt to unlawfully influence the outcome of the election. This case is significant because it represents the first-ever criminal prosecution of a former U.S. president and is the only one to have reached trial.
Despite the jury’s conviction, Trump has continued to argue that his victory in the 2024 presidential election should lead to the dismissal of the verdict and the case itself. Bragg has opposed these claims, suggesting alternative approaches such as freezing the proceedings during Trump’s time in office. As of now, Judge Merchan has not yet made a ruling on this matter.
Trump’s spokesperson, Steven Cheung, expressed frustration with the decision, accusing Judge Merchan of violating Supreme Court rulings on immunity. “Today’s decision by deeply conflicted, acting Justice Merchan in the Manhattan DA Witch Hunt is a direct violation of the Supreme Court’s decision on immunity, and other longstanding jurisprudence,” Cheung said in a statement. In contrast, Bragg’s office declined to comment on the judge’s ruling.
In another development, Judge Merchan also revealed that Trump had submitted a letter on December 3, alleging juror misconduct. While Merchan offered few details, he indicated that the matter would be made public with certain redactions.
Trump’s legal situation has become more complicated since his return to the presidential race. While the Manhattan hush money case progresses, other criminal proceedings have taken more favorable turns for the president-elect. Special Counsel Jack Smith dropped all charges against Trump in relation to his federal election subversion and classified documents cases. Meanwhile, the Georgia criminal case, concerning alleged election interference, has been temporarily paused as an appeals court reviews a pretrial defense challenge. Trump’s legal team has also pushed for the dismissal of this case.
Despite these legal challenges, Trump’s supporters remain confident in his ability to overcome the hurdles. The ongoing legal drama surrounding him has yet to definitively affect his ability to govern or his political future. However, his legal battles will likely continue to be a central issue as he embarks on his second term in office.