Judge Juan Merchan’s promise to rule by Tuesday on whether President Trump’s 34 secret money convictions can withstand presidential immunity could determine whether the next president takes office under imprisonment.

A jury selected from New York City returned a verdict of “guilty” on every charge filed by District Attorney Alvin Bragg. The case focused on payments Trump made to an adult film star through his lawyer Michael Cohen. Stormy DanielsHer real name is Stephanie Clifford. Mr. Bragg was able to turn misdemeanor false statements into felonies by tying them to his presidential campaign.

The task of punishing Trump for these convictions falls to Judge Merchan, whose presiding judgeship of the trial was determined by the hostility between the jurist and the defendant and who had previously restricted his speech. Saying that Judge Merchan “hates” him, the 45th president demanded that Judge Merchan recuse himself, citing his support for Democrats and the liberal political activism of his adult daughter, Loren.

Judge Merchan refused to recuse himself or lift the gag order because he spoke about his daughter. Trump complained that the judge “wrongly sought to deprive me of my First Amendment Right to speak out against the Weaponization of Law Enforcement.”

Judge Merchan granted Trump’s request to postpone the sentence until after last week’s election. It also postponed until tomorrow the decision on whether the Supreme Court’s decision that official presidential orders are exempt is related to the decisions.

Before Trump’s election victory, Judge Merchan was expected to rule in Mr. Bragg’s favor. Now that circumstances have changed, one might think that Trump’s election victory overturns the logic of sentencing Trump to prison, the usual punishment for a felony conviction.

If Judge Merchan rules Tuesday that immunity overturns the convictions, the Nov. 26 sentencing date could be overruled. At an earlier stage of the trial, the judge rejected Trump’s argument that presidential immunity barred Mr. Bragg’s case. The district attorney considers Trump’s “unfair claims” of immunity because the payments to Ms. Clifford were allegedly entirely private acts. Federal judge Alvin Hellerstein agreed that these actions were not official.

But the immunity picture is further complicated by the possibility that Trump will now be entitled to protection not only because he is the 45th president, but also because he is the 47th. The Justice Department has repeatedly reiterated its policy that sitting presidents are immune not only from impeachment but also from “any criminal conduct.” This immunity does not apply to civil cases and has never been tested by a prosecutor or judge.

Trump’s victory last week affects, first of all, the federal cases filed against him by Special Prosecutor Jack Smith, who works for the Department of Justice. Mr. Smith has already requested a delay in the election interference case, which could be a start to ending the case. The charges in the Mar-a-Lago case were dismissed by Judge Aileen Cannon pending appeal to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals.

Mr. Bragg’s state investigation — like that of District Attorney Fani Willis in Fulton County — is outside the control of the Justice Department and the scope of presidential prerogatives, such as the pardon power, which covers only “crimes against the United States” that are interpreted as federal crimes. . But Judge Merchan may still be working on a scenario in which the Supreme Court would weigh in.

If Judge Merchan agrees with Mr Bragg that the jury convicted only on the basis of “purely unofficial conduct” (the kind of actions for which the Supreme Court has found lacks immunity), then a prison sentence could follow. Any sentence may be appealed to the First Circuit of the Appellate Division, New York’s court of first review.

This approach, which will include briefings and hearings that could last months, could be effective for Trump. Last month, the First Circuit expressed doubt about Judge Arthur Engoron’s $455 million fraud verdict in the case brought by Attorney General Letitia James. One judge thought the “massive sentence in this case was disturbing”, while another struggled to understand the contours of what he considered a victimless crime.

This is because the possibility of a new president facing prison time could draw the Nine into the cause. In the immunity case, Trump / United StatesThe high court warned of “the ‘unique risks’ that arise if the President’s energies are diverted by actions that would make him ‘unduly cautious in the discharge of his official duties.’” energies.

But Judge Merchan could still choose to punish Trump and dare the high court to take action.