Trump Can Be Sentenced Friday In Hush Money Case – Supreme Court Says In 5-4 Ruling

Four conservative justices—Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh—voted to grant Trump’s request for a delay.

However, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett sided with the court’s three liberal justices to oppose it.

Judge Juan Merchan, who oversaw Trump’s trial, had scheduled the sentencing for Friday morning but indicated that Trump is unlikely to face penalties or prison time.

Read Also: What Transpired At Jimmy Carter’s State Funeral

The sentencing hearing will take place virtually at 9:30 a.m., with Trump appearing from Mar-a-Lago.

In a brief statement, the Supreme Court noted that Trump’s concerns could be addressed through the regular appeals process.

The Court also ruled that the burden of proceeding with sentencing was “relatively insubstantial” given the trial court’s stated intention not to impose penalties.

Trump’s emergency appeal to the high court was unusual, as the justices typically wait for state appeals to be fully resolved before stepping in.

His conviction is still under challenge, and Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg argued the Supreme Court lacked jurisdiction to consider Trump’s request to delay sentencing.

Trump was convicted in May of falsifying business records related to a $130,000 hush money payment made to adult-film star Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election, which Trump denies was linked to an affair.

Trump is fighting the conviction, claiming it should be overturned because a July ruling by a conservative-majority Supreme Court granted former presidents broad immunity for official actions.

Trump’s defense argued that evidence involving his time in office was improperly introduced at trial, but prosecutors contended these issues could be raised on appeal.

In December, Judge Merchan ruled that the evidence used in the trial was unrelated to Trump’s presidential conduct.

Trump’s lawyers argued that dealing with the sentencing would distract from his preparations for office and could harm national security. “Defending criminal litigation, especially at the sentencing stage, is uniquely taxing,” his attorneys wrote, emphasizing the critical nature of his transition work.

New York prosecutors dismissed these concerns, stating that there was a compelling public interest in proceeding with sentencing and that it would likely take no more than an hour.

Trump also argued that the case involved “great national importance” and could harm the nation’s constitutional structure if the sentencing were allowed to proceed.

The Supreme Court found itself in an ethics controversy following reports that Justice Alito spoke with Trump by phone earlier this week, just before the appeal was filed. Some congressional Democrats, including Rep.

Jamie Raskin of Maryland, called for Alito to recuse himself, citing the conversation as a potential conflict of interest. Alito responded by asserting that the sentencing case was not discussed during the call and that no other pending or future matters involving Trump were addressed.