This discussion delves into the recent legal maneuvers surrounding Donald Trump's cases. Veteran prosecutors analyze Judge Merchan's decision on immunity in a hush money case and the constitutional debates on prosecuting a sitting president. Insights are shared about how Trump's electoral win could influence ongoing civil cases, including the E Jean Carroll lawsuits. They also investigate the complexities of January 6th-related prosecutions, highlighting efforts by convicted individuals seeking presidential pardons amid swirling legal challenges.
Judge Mershon's postponement of the ruling allows for deeper analysis of presidential immunity's effect on ongoing legal challenges against Trump.
The debate over whether Trump's actions during January 6th can be considered under presidential duties may significantly impact civil accountability precedents.
Deep dives
Delay in Key Court Rulings
Judge Mershon’s recent decision to postpone a key ruling regarding the potential impact of presidential immunity on Donald Trump's jury verdict has significant implications for the ongoing legal matters. Both the Manhattan District Attorney's office and Trump's defense attorneys jointly requested this delay, prompting speculation about the judge’s motives and the nature of the forthcoming arguments. The postponement allows for further examination of constitutional arguments concerning whether a sitting president can be prosecuted, which impacts not only state legal proceedings but also future federal actions. The decision to delay ruling until next week means that both parties will have to submit their views, which could reshape the timeline and focus of the current legal challenges.
Constitutional Implications of Presidential Immunity
There is a considerable legal debate surrounding whether a sitting president can be prosecuted, driven by opinions from the Office of Legal Counsel, which argue that indictment and prosecution could inhibit the president's constitutional duties. These arguments suggest that a sentence, especially imprisonment, would physically prevent a president from fulfilling their role, raising questions about the broader implications for governance. Additionally, proponents of this perspective note the importance of maintaining the separation of powers and the principle that only Congress has the authority to impeach a president. Such legal frameworks thus complicate not only Trump's current standing but also the potential ramifications for future presidents and the legal system.
Civil Cases Stemming from January 6th
Several civil lawsuits have arisen from the events of January 6th, targeting Trump for damages caused by his alleged actions during the Capitol attack. Members of Congress and Capitol police officers are pursuing these cases, which hinge on whether Trump's conduct during the events falls under his official presidential duties or is considered unofficial conduct for which he could be held liable. The critical factor lies in the interpretation of presidential immunity, as articulated in previous court decisions, including Nixon v. Fitzgerald. While these civil cases progress through discovery, their outcomes may set important precedents for accountability in relation to presidential actions, especially involving unofficial conduct.
January 6th Defendants and Potential Pardons
The legal landscape for individuals charged in relation to the January 6th insurrection is further complicated by the potential for presidential pardons from Trump, should he be elected again. Many defendants have expressed hopes that they will receive pardons, which has led to several requests to defer sentencing decisions in light of this prospect. However, judges across multiple cases have denied such requests, emphasizing that the judiciary operates independently of political processes. This situation highlights the intricate connections between the justice system and political dynamics, especially as Trump holds the ability to influence outcomes through his pardon power if he returns to the presidency.
There's a lot to unpack around Donald Trump’s ongoing criminal and civil cases after he won last week's election. To begin with, veteran prosecutors Mary McCord and Andrew Weissmann explain why Judge Merchan agreed to the joint request to put off today's decision on the impact of immunity in his hush money case. Then, they dig into the constitutional arguments against prosecuting a president while in office, whether federally or as a state prosecution, and how that might also relate to sentencing in New York. Next up, Andrew and Mary illustrate how Trump’s win might impact his civil cases, to include both E Jean Carroll cases and his New York civil fraud case. And wrapping up, the duo reflect on the efforts by those convicted in J6 cases to have them dismissed or stayed, as they await a potential pardon by the president-elect.
Want to listen to this show without ads? Sign up for MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts. As a subscriber you’ll also be able to get occasional bonus content from this and other shows.
Get the Snipd podcast app
Unlock the knowledge in podcasts with the podcast player of the future.
AI-powered podcast player
Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features
Discover highlights
Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode
Save any moment
Hear something you like? Tap your headphones to save it with AI-generated key takeaways
Share & Export
Send highlights to Twitter, WhatsApp or export them to Notion, Readwise & more
AI-powered podcast player
Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features
Discover highlights
Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode