Trump asks Supreme Court to block his criminal hush money sentencing

(WASHINGTON) — President-elect Donald Trump has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to prevent Friday’s sentencing in his New York criminal hush money case.

In a filing Wednesday, defense lawyers argued that a New York judge lacks the authority to sentence the president-elect until Trump exhausts his appeal based on presidential immunity.

“This Court should enter an immediate stay of further proceedings in the New York trial court to prevent grave injustice and harm to the institution of the Presidency and the operations of the federal government,” Trump’s lawyers wrote.

The move came after a New York appeals court earlier Tuesday denied Trump’s request to delay the Jan. 10 sentencing.

Trump was found guilty in May on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records related to a hush money payment made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels in order to boost his electoral prospects in the 2016 presidential election.

In asking the Supreme Court to intervene, Trump has presented the court with an unprecedented situation of a former president — whose appointment of three justices cemented the court’s conservative majority — asking the country’s highest court to effectively toss his criminal conviction less than two weeks ahead of his inauguration.

Trump asked the Supreme Court to consider whether he is entitled to a stay of the proceedings during his appeal; whether presidential immunity prevents the use of evidence related to official acts; and whether a president-elect is entitled to the same immunity as a sitting president.

If adopted by the justices, Trump’s argument about immunity for a president-elect could expand the breadth of presidential authority, temporarily providing a private citizen with the absolute immunity reserved for a sitting president.

In a 6-3 decision last year, the Supreme Court broadened the limits of presidential immunity, finding that a former president is presumptively immune from criminal liability for any official acts and absolutely immune related to his core duties. The decision not only expanded the limits of presidential power but also upended the criminal cases faced by Trump.

Despite that favorable opinion, Trump faces uncertainty in convincing the justices to halt his sentencing. The Supreme Court does not typically take on random interlocutory appeals, even by a president-elect.

Trump’s lawyers also argued that the former president’s conviction relied on evidence of official acts, including his social media posts as president and testimony from his close White House advisers. The New York judge in the case, Juan Merchan, ruled that Trump’s conviction related “entirely to unofficial conduct” and “poses no danger of intrusion on the authority and function of the Executive Branch.”

“This appeal will ultimately result in the dismissal of the District Attorney’s politically motivated prosecution that was flawed from the very beginning, centered around the wrongful actions and false claims of a disgraced, disbarred serial-liar former attorney, violated President Trump’s due process rights, and had no merit,” Trump’s filing to the Supreme Court said.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.