Trump’s Request to Toss Guilty Verdict Ridiculed by Legal Experts, Citing Hunter Biden’s Pardon
Getty/AP
Legal experts have sharply criticized Donald Trump’s latest motion to dismiss his guilty verdict in New York, in which his lawyers invoked Hunter Biden’s sweeping pardon as part of their argument. The motion, filed to a New York state court, seeks to overturn a guilty verdict handed down by a jury in May, but legal analysts have quickly dismissed the filing as flawed and unlikely to succeed.
Trump’s lawyers submitted a 72-page motion that references Trump’s federal case and opinion rules from the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel. However, as legal experts pointed out, federal prosecutor guidelines do not apply to Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s state-level case.
“Since DA Bragg took office, he has engaged in ‘precisely the type of political theater’ that President Biden condemned,” the filing stated, attempting to link Bragg’s actions to President Biden’s political stance. Former ethics czar Norm Eisen swiftly refuted this claim, criticizing it in a Bluesky thread.
BREAKING: Donald Trump filed his motion 2 dismiss the 34 guilty verdicts & Manhattan prosecution This effort to overturn the jury's verdict fails 4 many reasons…above all bc the pros wasn't based on official conduct protected by Trump v. US (1/x)
— Norm Eisen (@normeisen.bsky.social) December 4, 2024 at 2:35 AM
[image or embed]
Eisen also pointed out a particularly dubious argument made by Trump’s legal team, which suggested the creation of a “new constitutional category of pre-presidential privileges.” This argument claimed that the case should be dismissed because it “disrupts his transition efforts and his preparations.” Eisen noted that such a law simply does not exist.
Brad Heath, a judicial reporter for Reuters, highlighted that the reference to the Biden pardon appeared on the first page of the motion, concluding that it was “likely written for an audience other than the judge.” Heath’s assessment echoed a broader sense that the filing was more about generating public attention than making a legitimate legal argument.
Trump also invents a new constitutional category of pre-presidential privileges, arguing that the case must be dismissed bc it "disrupts his transition efforts and his preparations." But there's no such legal rule! Indeed… (5/x)
— Norm Eisen (@normeisen.bsky.social) December 4, 2024 at 2:44 AM
Roger Parloff, senior editor at Lawfare, also chimed in, sharing a screen capture on X (formerly Twitter) that revealed Trump’s request for a two-week stay in the case. “Trump asks that if Justice Merchan plans to deny his now two pending motions to dismiss and schedule a sentencing that grants Trump a 2-week stay so he can seek a federal injunction,” Parloff noted.
The State Democracy Defenders Action organization also issued a statement, calling for accountability: “Trump, like everyone else, should be held accountable for his crimes.”
The first page of this filing is written for an audience other than the judge.
— Brad Heath (@bradheath.bsky.social) December 4, 2024 at 3:05 AM
[image or embed]
