Judge Juan Merchan has officially rejected President-elect Donald Trump’s request to dismiss the charges brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg under the argument of presidential immunity. The decision delivers a blow to Trump’s legal team, which has been leaning heavily on the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling that former presidents are entitled to substantial immunity for official acts conducted while in office.
Merchan’s ruling, however, was swift and clear: the conduct at the heart of this case—34 counts of falsifying business records—falls squarely outside the realm of “official acts.” In his statement, Merchan wrote that the evidence in question pertained entirely to “unofficial conduct” and, therefore, “receives no immunity protections.”
Even if the challenged evidence could somehow be tied to official conduct, Merchan argued that its use in the trial posed “no danger of intrusion on the authority and function of the Executive Branch.” In short: immunity doesn’t apply, and even if it did, the court says Trump’s guilt was supported by “overwhelming evidence.”
This rejection is just the latest chapter in a legal battle that has already dragged on for years. Trump’s attorneys initially sought to overturn the jury’s guilty verdict on all counts by citing the Supreme Court’s immunity decision. Specifically, they argued that testimony and evidence tied to Trump’s official duties—like testimony from former aides, his social media posts, and his handling of congressional investigations—were improperly admitted during the trial.
But Merchan didn’t bite. He dismissed their motion while still leaving Trump’s formal request to dismiss the case outright unresolved. For Trump’s team, that unresolved request is now their last lifeline in this case.
Predictably, Trump’s camp came out swinging in response. Incoming White House Communications Director Steven Cheung blasted Merchan’s ruling as a “direct violation” of the Supreme Court’s immunity decision, labeling the case “lawless” and politically motivated. Cheung doubled down on the argument that Trump is being targeted for his political views and the movement he represents, calling for the case to be “immediately dismissed” to allow Trump to execute the presidential transition without interference.
Let’s not forget the broader context here: Bragg’s prosecution of Trump, stemming from alleged hush money payments, is unprecedented. No former president—or president-elect—has ever faced such charges, much less during the run-up to a transition. Trump’s legal team has consistently argued that this case is nothing more than “failed lawfare”—a weaponized legal attack designed to distract, disrupt, and delegitimize Trump’s presidency before it even begins.
Adding fuel to the fire, Trump attorneys have pointed out that Bragg himself has suggested pausing the case until the end of Trump’s second term. While that might sound like a compromise to some, Trump’s team isn’t having it. They argue that dragging the case out until after Trump leaves office—a decade after Bragg’s office began its investigation—only underscores the absurdity of the entire prosecution.
The Trump camp’s position is clear: the charges should never have been brought. This was a politically motivated case, plain and simple. It’s no coincidence, they say, that Trump’s legal woes keep cropping up just as his political momentum grows. Whether it’s Alvin Bragg’s Manhattan case or Jack Smith’s failed federal prosecutions, Trump’s team sees these legal battles as coordinated efforts to weaken their candidate and slow down the transition process.
