President-elect Donald Trump‘s legal attempts to postpone his hush money sentencing, scheduled just 10 days before his inauguration, are a “predicament” of his own making, a legal expert has said.
Preet Bharara, a former U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York who was fired by Trump in 2017, made the remarks Tuesday’s episode of the Cafe Insider podcast, which he co-hosts with former federal prosecutor Joyce Vance.
Newsweek has contacted Trump’s legal team and Vance for comment via email and Bharara for further comment via social media.
Why It Matters
Trump is set to make history as the first convicted felon to be sworn in as U.S. president on January 20. Bharara has suggested that Judge Juan Merchan, who will oversee the sentencing hearing, did not intend to make a political statement when he set the January 10 date.
President-elect Donald Trump speaks to members of the media during a press conference at the Mar-a-Lago Club on January 07, 2025 in Palm Beach, Florida. A former federal prosecutor has hit out at Trump’s attempts to dismiss or postpone his hush money sentencing.
Scott Olson/Getty Images
What to Know
Speaking on Tuesday’s episode of Cafe Insider, Bharara highlighted that Merchan’s decision to schedule the January 10 sentencing followed Trump’s own request to delay proceedings until after November’s election.
Merchan said in his ruling that Trump’s request to postpone the hearing came with “implied consent” that, if elected, the Republican would face sentencing between November 5 and his January 20 inauguration.
Trump’s legal team sought to dismiss the case, saying the hearing would interfere with the presidential transition process. On Tuesday, a New York appeals court rejected Trump’s attempts to have the case thrown out while arguing that presidential immunity protections are extended to a president-elect.
On Wednesday, Trump asked the Supreme Court to halt his hush money sentence.
Trump was convicted in May of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records. Prosecutors alleged that Trump directed his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, to pay adult film star Stormy Daniels $130,000 to conceal an alleged affair ahead of the 2016 election. The payment was recorded in Trump Organization documents as legal fees. Trump has denied the charges.
The sentencing, originally scheduled for July 2024, was postponed to September while the court considered the implications of a Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity.
Merchan then agreed to a further delay until after the 2024 election to avoid appearing to influence the outcome. Following Trump’s election victory, the judge postponed the sentencing indefinitely before setting the January 10 date last week.
What People Are Saying
Preet Bharara on Cafe Insider: “The predicament that Trump finds himself in is of his own making. Again and again, Trump engages in this argument that something is unfair when he’s the cause of the delay in the first place.”
Judge Juan Merchan in a January 3 ruling: “While Defendant [Trump] now claims this Court cannot and must not sentence Defendant, the record is clear that Defendant not only consented to, but in fact requested the very adjournment that led us down the path we are on. Any claim Defendant may have that circumstances have changed as a result of Defendant’s victory in the Presidential election, while convenient, is disingenuous. Defendant has always pronounced, since the inception of this case, confidence and indeed the expectation, that he would prevail in the 2024 election—confidence that has proven well-founded.
“Thus, it was fair for this Court to trust that his request to adjourn sentencing until after the election carried with it the implied consent that he would face sentence during the window between the election and the taking of the oath of office.”
Joyce Vance, a former U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Alabama during the Barack Obama administration, on Cafe Insider: “This is such an elegant argument that the judge is making, in essence, putting it on Trump, saying you misled the court. To come in now and ask to stop sentencing is disingenuous.”
Trump’s attorneys in Wednesday’s request to the Supreme Court: “President Trump is currently engaged in the most crucial and sensitive tasks of preparing to assume the Executive Power in less than two weeks, all of which are essential to the United States’ national security and vital interests. Forcing President Trump to prepare for a criminal sentencing in a felony case while he is preparing to lead the free world as President of the United States in less than two weeks imposes an intolerable, unconstitutional burden on him that undermines these vital national interests.”
President-elect Donald Trump, on Truth Social, on January 5: “Virtually every legal scholar and pundit says there is no (ZERO!) case against me. The judge fabricated the facts, and the law, no different than the other New York judicial and prosecutorial witch hunts. The legal system is broken, and businesses can’t take a chance on getting caught up in this quicksand. It’s all rigged in this case against a political opponent, ME!!!”
What Happens Next
Trump will now have no further steps of appeal to take if the Supreme Court, the nation’s highest court, does not agree to pause his hush money sentence.
Merchan has ordered Trump to appear in person in New York or virtually for the January 10 sentencing.
The judge has indicated that he will not impose a custodial sentence on the president-elect. Instead, Merchan has suggested that an unconditional discharge—allowing Trump to be immediately released after sentencing while his conviction remains on record—may be the most appropriate option.
This post was originally published on here
