Here's a narrative script based on recent events involving Donald Trump's court trials:
As we step into February 2025, the legal entanglements surrounding Donald Trump continue to unfold. Just a few weeks ago, on January 8, Trump made an urgent appeal to the Supreme Court, seeking to halt his criminal sentencing in a New York hush money case. Trump, who was found guilty of 34 counts of falsifying business records to hide reimbursements made to adult film star Stormy Daniels, argued that preparing for sentencing while preparing to lead the country as President imposed an "intolerable, unconstitutional burden" on him.
In his 40-page filing, signed by John Sauer, Trump's intended nominee for solicitor general, Trump cited the Supreme Court's decision in *Trump v. United States*, arguing that the criminal proceedings in state court should be put on hold while his claims of presidential immunity are addressed. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who handles emergency appeals from New York, directed prosecutors to respond to Trump's request by January 9.
However, Judge Juan Merchan, who presided over Trump's trial, had already indicated that he did not intend to sentence Trump to jail time, instead planning to give him an "unconditional discharge." This meant that Trump would not face any serious punishment, but the fact of his conviction would remain.
Despite Merchan's intentions, Trump's legal team has been working to overturn his conviction. They argue that the trial court erred by admitting evidence related to Trump's official acts, which, according to the Supreme Court's decision in *Trump v. United States*, should have been excluded unless prosecutors cleared a high legal threshold.
Will Thomas, an assistant professor of business law at the University of Michigan's Ross School of Business, notes that this new framework has placed Trump's New York conviction in jeopardy. Trump's legal team has taken aim, pointing to language in *Trump v. United States* to argue that the conviction should be erased. The case is now headed to the New York Court of Appeals, which might agree with Trump's team that the Supreme Court's decisions require the conviction to be overturned.
The Supreme Court's decision in *Trump v. United States* has transformed Trump's New York case into a federal matter, making it likely that the Supreme Court will eventually weigh in. Trump has already tried to skip to the end, asking the Supreme Court to shortcut New York's appeals courts and take his case now. While the high court declined his request, four conservative justices publicly noted their disagreement, signaling that they are ready to take up the issue of Trump's conviction sooner rather than later. The stage is set for Trump to challenge his New York conviction, and if things go his way, he may not only avoid punishment for his crimes but also stop being a criminal.
This content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI
