President-elect Donald Trump appeals to US Supreme Court to halt hush money sentencing

President-elect Donald Trump has asked the US Supreme Court to intervene and cancel his upcoming sentencing in the New York hush money case scheduled for Friday (January 10).

Trump’s legal team appealed to the Supreme Court on Wednesday (January 8) after New York courts declined to delay the sentencing by Judge Juan M. Merchan. Merchan, who oversaw Trump’s trial and conviction last May on 34 felony counts related to falsifying business records, has indicated he will not impose jail time, fines, or probation.

Trump's attorneys argue that a previous Supreme Court ruling, which grants broad immunity to presidents from criminal prosecution, should apply to his case.

While the ruling pertained to a different matter, they contend that it implies some of the evidence used in the hush money trial should have been shielded by presidential immunity. Merchan, however, has disagreed with this interpretation.

The justices have requested a response from prosecutors by Thursday morning.

Trump's legal team argued that his sentencing should be postponed while he appeals his conviction, citing the potential for “grave injustice and harm” to the institution of the Presidency and the federal government’s operations.

The emergency motion was filed by lawyers John Sauer, Trump's choice for solicitor general, and Todd Blanche, a candidate for second-in-command at the Justice Department.

Their filing contends that the New York trial court “lacks authority” to proceed with sentencing or any further criminal proceedings against Trump until his appeal, which raises significant claims of Presidential immunity, is resolved—possibly through review by the Supreme Court.

Trump’s spokesman, Steven Cheung, called for the case to be dismissed in a statement, while the former president also filed an emergency appeal before New York's highest court.

The Manhattan District Attorney’s office has indicated it will respond in court.

Trump’s convictions stemmed from allegations of attempting to conceal a $130,000 hush money payment to porn star Stormy Daniels shortly before the 2016 election. Daniels claims she had a sexual encounter with Trump in 2006, which he denies.

Trump's legal team asserts that a Supreme Court ruling in a separate election interference case, which granted presidential immunity, should shield some of the evidence used in the hush money trial, including testimony from White House aides and Trump’s social media posts. Judge Merchan disagreed, ruling that these were personal matters unrelated to presidential duties. The Supreme Court’s immunity ruling primarily dealt with official actions of presidents in office.

(with AP inputs)