Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram
Justice Merchan’s judgement could place a guilty judgement on Trump’s record though it would not impose custody, a fine or probation. (Photo: AP)
In a setback for US President-elect Donald Trump, the US Supreme Court has rejected his plea to delay his sentencing in a New York state court for conviction on criminal charges stemming from hush money paid to a porn star.
The Supreme Court in a 5-4 judgement denied Trump’s last minute attempt to prevent the sentencing in the hush money case, scheduled for Friday at 9:30 am (Eastern Time) in Manhattan’s New York state court.
The order by the Supreme Court read, “First, the alleged evidentiary violations at president-elect Trump’s state-court trial can be addressed in the ordinary course on appeal. Second, the burden that sentencing will impose on the president-elect’s responsibilities is relatively insubstantial in light of the trial court’s stated intent to impose a sentence of ‘unconditional discharge’ after a brief virtual hearing,” reported Reuters.
However, the trial judge Justice Juan Merchan, who is overseeing Trump’s hush money case said last week that he was not inclined to imprison the president-elect but rather grant him unconditional discharge.
Justice Merchan’s judgement could place a guilty judgement on Trump’s record though it would not impose custody, a fine or probation.
The four conservative judges who dissented from the majority Supreme Court decision were – Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh. They noted that they would have granted Trump’s request.
Trump had approached the US Supreme Court after New York’s top court rejected the Republican leader’s request to halt the sentencing in the hush money trial.
Manhattan prosecutors had filed a plea in the Supreme Court on Thursday morning, opposing Trump’s attempt to stay the proceedings in the New York state court.
“Defendant now asks this court to take the extraordinary step of intervening in a pending state criminal trial to prevent the scheduled sentencing from taking place – before final judgment has been entered by the trial court, and before any direct appellate review of defendant’s conviction. There is no basis for such intervention,” the district attorney of Manhattan, Alvin Bragg’s office, wrote in a filing, reported Reuters.
Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram