The Weekend Wrap: July 14, 2024

More fallout from the immunity decision

Welcome to the Weekend Wrap! Here are the week’s white collar highlights:

Trump Prosecutions

D.C. Federal Case - January 6 Allegations

Once the case returns to Judge Chutkan in early August, we should learn more about how she intends to proceed in light of the Supreme Court’s immunity decision. Whatever she decides, it’s pretty clear this case is not going to trial any time soon.

Speaking of the immunity decision - people have been trying to figure out what it means ever since it was announced. One point of confusion is whether the Court’s opinion will mean that it is effectively impossible to prosecute a former president for bribery, because bribery relates to official acts and most official acts are now apparently off limits. In her dissent, Justice Sotomayor claimed that the president was now immune from bribery prosecutions.

On Thursday I wrote about why I disagree with Sotomayor. If you missed that post, you can find it here:

Prosecuting a President for Bribery After Trump v. United States

New York State Case - Hush Money/False Business Records

Judge Merchan continued Trump’s sentencing, originally set for last Thursday, to September 18, to allow the parties to file briefs on the effect of the Supreme Court’s immunity decision on Trump’s convictions.

Judge Juan Merchan (New York Times/Ahmed Gaber)

On Wednesday Trump’s attorneys filed a 55-page brief arguing the convictions must be set aside. They point primarily to the testimony from Trump Communications Director Hope Hicks and Special Assistant to the President Madeleine Westerhout, as well as Trump Tweets that were introduced into evidence. They argue that the Tweets and the testimony about White House conversations were all prohibited by the newly-announced presidential immunity because they all related to the president’s core responsibilities, including his duty to communicate with the public.

Prosecutors will argue that this evidence did not relate to matters within the “outer perimeter” of Trump’s official responsibilities and so is not subject to immunity. The events did take place while Trump was president, but they related to his response to a New York state investigation, to campaign-related matters, and to events that took place prior to his election.

The defense arguments strike me as pretty weak. None of these actions related to official presidential duties. These should all fall into the category of unofficial acts, which all agree are not immune.

Last year, when Trump tried to remove the case from state to federal court, a federal judge ruled that the events surrounding this prosecution did not relate to Trump’s official responsibilities. That should be the end result here, even after the new immunity decision. I expect that’s how Judge Merchan will rule.