Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office is seeking to maintain the verdicts and indictment of President-elect Donald Trump’s falsified business records case.
Bragg filed the request to New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan on Dec. 9 after Trump submitted a motion to dismiss last week.
Trump had argued that both the verdicts and the indictment should be immediately dismissed in the interests of justice. His attorneys cited concerns about presidential immunity and the process of Trump’s transition to assuming power in the White House.
“At most, [the] defendant should receive temporary accommodations during his presidency to prevent this criminal case from meaningfully interfering with his official decision-making,” the filing read.
“But multiple accommodations well short of dismissal and vacatur would satisfy that objective, including a stay of proceedings during his term in office if judgment has not been entered before presidential immunity attaches.”
Bragg’s office maintained that throwing out the indictment and verdicts would undermine confidence in the justice system.
It also leveled multiple arguments about presidential immunity, which Trump cited heavily in his motion.
“There are no grounds for relief now, prior to defendant’s inauguration, because President-elect immunity does not exist,” his office said.
Trump’s other criminal cases either came to a close or seemed headed in a similar direction. Last week, Trump told the Georgia Court of Appeals that it should direct a lower court to dismiss prosecutor Fani Willis’s case against him in the state.
Trump’s two federal criminal cases ended after the election and following requests from special counsel Jack Smith, who had cited longstanding Department of Justice (DOJ) policy against prosecuting sitting presidents. A DOJ memo from 2000 states that doing so violates the Constitution.
Bragg said the federal cases differed from the one in New York.
“Given the nascent stage of those prosecutions, dismissal without prejudice was minimally disruptive, particularly because doing so did not require the court to vacate a jury verdict,” his office said.
“Here, by contrast, the criminal proceeding is significantly more advanced, and dismissal would unwind completed phases of the criminal proceeding that the public has an interest in preserving.”
“Wrongly continuing proceedings in this failed lawfare case disrupts President Trump’s transition efforts and his preparations to wield the full Article II executive power authorized by the Constitution pursuant to the overwhelming national mandate granted to him by the American people on November 5, 2024,” his motion reads.
The motion followed Merchan’s adjourning sentencing previously scheduled for Nov. 26.
In May, a jury found Trump guilty on 34 felony counts, raising the prospect that he could face prison.
Bragg’s office told Merchan that “the President-elect … does not perform any Article II functions under the Constitution, and therefore there are no Article II functions that would be burdened by ordinary criminal process involving the President-elect.”
It also noted that the conduct in question—regarding a payment to an associate—was unofficial conduct and cited a district court opinion on this issue.
