Trump not eligible for immunity in New York hush money case, judge rules

The New York judge in President-elect Donald Trump’s criminal hush money case ruled Monday that the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity opinion does not apply to that case.

Trump had sought to dismiss the indictment and vacate the jury verdict on the grounds that prosecutors introduced evidence relating to Trump’s official acts as president, after the Supreme Court ruled in July that Trump is entitled to presumptive immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts undertaken while in office.

However, Judge Juan Merchan said on Monday that the evidence in Trump’s hush money case related “entirely to unofficial conduct” and “poses no danger of intrusion on the authority and function of the Executive Branch.”

Trump was found guilty in May on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records related to a hush money payment made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels in order to boost his electoral prospects in the 2016 presidential election. Judge Merchan has yet to hand down a sentence.

In his ruling Monday, Merchan judge found that there was “overwhelming evidence of guilt” that led the jury to convict Trump at his trial last spring.

The judge rejected Trump’s argument that the testimony of his White House communications director Hope Hicks, his Twitter posts about his attorney Michael Cohen, and other evidence constitute official acts.

“Just as the title of Communications Director does not bestow absolute immunity to any and all communications with Ms. Hicks, neither does mere reference to the Justice Department convert a Tweet to an official act,” Merchan wrote in his ruling.

“It is therefore logical and reasonable to conclude that if the act of falsifying records to cover up the payments so that the public would not be made aware is decidedly an unofficial act, so too should the communications to further that same cover-up be unofficial,” the judge wrote

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.