President-elect Donald Trump asked the US Supreme Court to intervene to prevent his Jan 10 hush money sentencing from going ahead after New York appellate judge rejected his argument that his November presidential election win should be vacated the guilty verdict.

(Jan 8): President-elect Donald Trump asked the US Supreme Court to intervene in his hush money criminal case to prevent his Jan 10 sentencing from going forward.

The filing with the nation’s highest court came after a New York appellate judge rejected Trump’s argument that his guilty verdict on 34 felony counts should be vacated in light of his victory in the November presidential election, which would have blocked the sentencing.

The filing is a last ditch effort by Trump to put the case behind him before his inauguration on Jan 20. The outcome hinges on Trump’s argument that the verdict violates his presidential immunity, even though he hasn’t yet been sworn in.

“This court should enter an immediate stay of further proceedings in the New York trial court to prevent grave injustice and harm to the institution of the Presidency and the operations of the federal government,” Trump’s lawyers said in the filing.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who handles emergency matters from New York, asked state prosecutors to respond to the filing by Thursday. A spokesperson for Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who brought the case against Trump, said they will respond in court papers.

Justice Juan Merchan, who oversaw the trial, has already said he won’t sentence Trump to any time behind bars due to his status as president-elect. But Trump wants the verdict tossed out regardless to prevent the sentencing from tainting his presidential transition.

According to the filing with the Supreme Court, Trump simultaneously filed an application for an emergency stay to the New York Court of Appeals, the state’s highest court.

‘Falsifying business records’

A Manhattan jury in May found Trump guilty of falsifying business records to conceal payments to an adult film star before the 2016 election. He is appealing two decisions by Merchan that rejected his argument for vacating the verdict on presidential immunity grounds.

Bragg has argued Trump doesn’t have immunity because the conviction was handed down months before the election, when Trump wasn’t even president-elect. The appeals process heated up after Merchan ruled last week that the sentencing must proceed because presidents-elect aren’t immune from prosecution.

With jail off the table, Merchan said last week that a sentence of an “unconditional discharge” was the most viable solution, meaning the 78-year-old incoming president would face no real penalty other than having the conviction remain on his record. In theory Trump could have faced up to four years in prison, though the judge said prosecutors already conceded that wasn’t a “practicable recommendation”.

The US Supreme Court case is Trump v New York, 24A666.

Uploaded by Felyx Teoh