Attorneys have argued that President Donald Trump has a wide array of grounds for appealing his case in New York—indicating the legal battles are far from over and could even reach the U.S. Supreme Court.
The former president has already asked the Supreme Court to intervene but that seemed unlikely as the Court previously rejected an attempt by Special Counsel Jack Smith to fast-track Trump’s immunity appeal in Washington.
An appeal would likely make its way through the New York court system —first, in the Appellate Division of the First Judicial Department and then to the New York Court of Appeals. It could also reach federal courts if Trump alleges violation of federal law or the U.S. Constitution.
John Shu, a constitutional law expert who served in both Bush administrations, told The Epoch Times he didn’t think the indictment was “constitutionally acceptable.” “The indictment seemed intentionally vague, so much so that Bragg, not the grand jury, submitted a separate statement of facts,” Shu said.
How successful an appeal would be has been the subject of debate. Although the prospects for appealing verdicts are generally low, George Washington University Law Professor Jonathan Turley said it was likely the case would be reversed. He wrote in The Hill that the trial had “multiple layers of reversible error” and said he was “shocked” by New York State Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan’s rulings.
Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz doubted that Trump would succeed in the Appellate Division and instead suggested he bypass that court and go directly to the New York Court of Appeals.
Attorneys pointed to the jury instructions, nature of the indictment, testimony, evidence, and concerns about Merchan’s bias as potential grounds for appeal. Trump could also re-raise his concerns about the choice of venue in liberal Manhattan.
Questions have been raised about whether the jury instructions facilitated actual unanimity in the verdict. Merchan told jurors they didn’t have to agree on the unlawful conduct that Trump allegedly committed in an attempt to influence the 2016 election—only that he caused one of three forms.
Neama Rahmani, a former federal prosecutor, defended the jury instructions and likened the ambiguity to what jurors might face in assessing aggravating factors in trials. He also argued that the concerns about Merchan’s daughter, who worked for a Democratic consulting firm, weren’t enough to warrant recusal.
Heritage Foundation Vice President John Malcolm questioned whether the jury instructions provided adequate due process for the former president. He also said that Trump could raise arguments surrounding Merchan’s impartiality on appeal.
Testimonies from both Stephanie Clifford and Michael Cohen provoked concerns about the scope of information reaching the jury. Clifford, whose stage name is Stormy Daniels, discussed, for example, whether Trump used a condom during their alleged sexual encounter.
It’s unclear, however, whether the defense waived its right to use some objections to that testimony on appeal. During trial, Merchan indicated the defense didn’t object enough during Clifford’s testimony.
—Sam Dorman
CONSERVATIVES MULL CONVICTION RESPONSE
With the initial shock of President Trump’s conviction wearing down, some conservatives in Congress are looking ahead for ways they can respond.
Immediately following the conviction, members from across the Republican ideological spectrum were quick to condemn the outcome, with House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) saying that the verdict represents “a shameful day in American history.”
But for many Republicans, words aren’t enough to deal with what they see as a threat to Americans’ fundamental freedoms and the judicial system meant to protect them—they want to see action.
But what that action may look like is still unclear, with several competing ideas still being thrown around by conservatives.
“Right now, we’re talking about a lot of things, but there’s nothing imminent to talk about,” Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.) told The Epoch Times.
At least one suggestion on how to move forward has come from leadership in the form of a “three-pronged approach” proposed by Johnson.
Johnson said House Republicans would wield the power of the purse, other legislation, and the chamber’s oversight authorities to protect the integrity of the American justice system.
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), an outspoken ally of Trump, told The Epoch Times she'd go a step further.
“There should be no federal funding for lower Manhattan—zero federal dollars,” Greene said.
Speaking about the ideas being thrown around, Rep. Dan Bishop (R-N.C.) told The Epoch Times, “I’m all for them,” but he added that Republicans need a clear idea on how to respond before they move ahead with any course of action.
Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) was doubtful that Republicans would take such an approach, however.
“I'll just say ... I wouldn’t go put a lot of money in Vegas on the willingness of a Republican conference to hold the line on a spending fight heading into September,” Roy opined.
Over on the Senate side, a group of 13 lawmakers have shared their own plans for responding to the verdict—namely, by playing hardball and ramping up their obstruction of President Joe Biden’s judicial and legislative agenda.
In a May 31 statement, Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) and seven other Republican senators vowed to block Biden’s appointees, and say they'll also oppose spending increases not related to national security and will seek to block any Democrat-backed bill not directly related to public safety.
“The Democratic Party is cheerleading efforts to imprison Donald Trump and save Joe Biden from the electoral consequences of his disastrous presidency,” Lee told The Epoch Times.
“They do not get to return to Congress and expect friendly cooperation from Republicans—they can and will be stopped.”
Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) said obstruction would “fight fire with fire.”
Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) said there is “pretty much a war that is going on.”
“It’s not Republican and Democrat. It’s American versus anti-American,” Tuberville said. “Nobody trusts the justice system anymore. They don’t trust us up here.”
“We can’t act like it’s business as usual,” agreed Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.). “It’s not business as usual: They convicted our presidential candidate, they’re trying to put him in jail so he can’t run.”
Even as Republicans mull a response, they have few effective legislative avenues available to them.
Any bill making cuts to the DOJ or other federal law enforcement would need to get through the Democrat-controlled Senate as well as Biden.
Republicans’ best opportunity to challenge Democrats on the issue will come in September, when 2025 government funding is due.
In the interim, Republicans have few options other than to continue their investigations into the matter and attempt to derail some Democrat legislative agenda items.
—Joseph Lord
BOOKMARKS
The Georgia Court of Appeal ordered on June 5 a stay on all proceedings in Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’s case against Trump and eight codefendants, The Epoch Times’ Catherine Yang reported. The case comes as the court is poised to consider whether or not to disqualify Willis from leading the case. Proceedings in the criminal trial won’t be pursued until that matter is resolved.
The American Civil Liberties Union announced that it will spend more than $25 million on the 2024 election, The Epoch Times’ Austin Alonzo reported. Much of that funding will be focused on pro-abortion ballot measures and state-level races, though the left-leaning organization also plans to back a pro-abortion candidate in the Wisconsin U.S. Senate race.
Senate Republicans yesterday blocked a bill that would codify a federal right to contraception, The Epoch Times’ Samantha Flom reported. In a procedural vote, the Senate elected 51-39 to block the bill, which needed 60 votes, from advancing.
As first son Hunter Biden’s criminal trial entered its third day yesterday, jurors heard testimony from his ex-wife and ex-girlfriend about his crack cocaine addiction, The Epoch Times’ Jacob Burg and Stacy Robinson reported. With the inclusion of his ex-partners’ testimonies, prosecutors are trying to prove that Biden knowingly lied on a gun application form when he said he wasn’t a drug addict.
Speaker Johnson won’t commit to backing a proposal by Greene to put a vote on the floor to impeach Biden, The Epoch Times’ Savannah Hulsey Pointer reported. Greene has threatened to force a vote on the measure by making it a privileged resolution, which would tie Johnson’s hands.
