Former President Donald Trump’s lawyers argue that tweets used as evidence in his criminal hush money trial are protected by presidential immunity and should not have been admitted.

Trump's attorneys are now seeking to overturn the conviction secured by Manhattan D.A. Alvin Bragg by asserting that these tweets were part of his official duties and are therefore exempted from use due to a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling on immunity, as the Washington Examiner reports.

Legal Team Asserts Tweets as Official Duties

The former president's legal team, led by attorney Todd Blanche, contends that the tweets cited in the trial fall under the protection of presidential immunity.

Blanche claims that efforts by the Manhattan district attorney to rebut this immunity are flawed. Citing U.S. Supreme Court recognition of a president's authority to comment on public matters, Blanche argues that these tweets should be considered part of Trump's official duties.

The tweets in question span from April 21 to Aug. 22, 2018, during the investigation of Trump's former lawyer, Michael Cohen. On April 21, Trump tweeted that Cohen would never “flip” on him, despite the ongoing investigation. Then, on Aug. 22, following Cohen's guilty plea, Trump advised against hiring Cohen as a lawyer.

Blanche emphasizes that at least two of these tweets were directly related to Trump’s official duties, involving ongoing investigations.

He states, "These Tweets touched on ‘[i]nvestigative and prosecutorial decisionmaking,’ which is the ‘special province’ of the President." This argument is bolstered by a Supreme Court ruling on July 1, which recognized former presidents have immunity for official acts.

District Attorney Disputes Immunity Claims

Bragg is attempting to counter this argument, claiming the tweets were part of the public record and not protected by presidential immunity.

Prosecutors argue that Trump’s tweets were unofficial acts, made in a personal capacity rather than as part of his presidential duties. They state, "Defendant is wrong to claim that the recent Supreme Court decision would apply ‘absolute immunity with respect to these Tweets.’"

The conviction in question stems from Trump's falsification of records related to a payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels. Trump was convicted on May 30, and his sentencing was initially set for July 11 but was delayed to Sept. 18 to address the immunity motions.

Sentencing Delayed Amid Legal Debates

Blanche is pushing for Trump's conviction to be overturned based on the Supreme Court's recent ruling. He argues that this ruling should invalidate Trump's conviction, as it supports the notion that his tweets were made in an official capacity.

The legal team’s motion also seeks Judge Juan Merchan’s recusal from the case, citing a potential conflict of interest due to Merchan's daughter, Loren Merchan, working for a campaign consulting firm associated with prominent Democrats.

Judge Merchan is set to rule on Trump's effort to overturn the conviction on Sept. 6. If the conviction stands, Trump could face various penalties, including jail time, fines, probation, or house arrest. The ongoing legal battle highlights the complexities surrounding presidential immunity and the scope of official duties.

Conflict of Interest Allegations

The allegation of a conflict of interest involving Judge Merchan adds another layer of complexity to the case. Trump's legal team is concerned that Loren Merchan's association with a Democratic campaign consulting firm could influence the judge's impartiality. This issue will likely be a point of contention as the case progresses.

As the legal arguments unfold, the court must decide whether Trump's tweets are indeed protected by presidential immunity. This decision could have significant implications for how presidential actions are interpreted in future legal contexts.

Conclusion

In summary, Trump's lawyers are seeking to overturn his criminal conviction by arguing that tweets used as evidence are protected by presidential immunity.

The tweets, spanning from April to August 2018, were related to Michael Cohen's investigation. Trump's legal team cites Supreme Court recognition of a president's authority to comment on public matters, while prosecutors argue the tweets were unofficial acts.

The court's decision on this matter, expected on Sept. 6, will determine whether Trump's conviction stands and what penalties he might face. Additionally, allegations of a conflict of interest involving Judge Merchan add further complexity to the case.

The outcome of this legal battle could set important precedents regarding presidential immunity and official duties.