George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley said Friday that Judge Juan Marchan's decision to postpone former President Donald Trump's sentence could be a move to avoid giving momentum to Trump's election campaign.
Judge Marchan had scheduled Trump's sentencing for September 18th but on Friday postponed it to November 26th “if necessary.” According to Turley, in America Report, argued that Marchand's ruling in Trump's case was beneficial for his reelection, and suggested that upholding the September ruling date would further strengthen support for the former president. (Related: “Political justice”: Kamala Harris' antics during confirmation hearings hint at the “radical” judge she will nominate).
clock:
Jonathan Turley says Marchand knew sentencing Trump before the election would help him win. pic.twitter.com/BWMG03ZA44
— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) September 6, 2024
“I think any sentence Marchan would have handed down would not have been particularly well received by much of the public. It would be reminiscent of this campaign against the former president,” Turley said. “So in some ways, the Harris campaign may be pleased that the Manhattan case won't be getting as much attention.”
Judge Marchan said in his order that he delayed ruling “to avoid the appearance, however unjustified, that the litigation was influenced or attempted to be influenced by the proximity of a presidential election in which Defendants are running.” The judge's ruling in the Trump business records trial appeared to favor Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg while tending to thwart the former president's defense, as Judge Marchan granted many of the prosecutors' requests while rejecting those of the defense.
“I am not one of Marchan's detractors, but after sitting in the courtroom I have to say I was extremely surprised by the one-sided approach to the trial. In my view there was a lack of balance. I have never heard anything like that from Marchan,” the law professor added. “He refused to do anything during the trial that would have been appropriate for the environment in which the trial was being conducted, including a gag order which I believe was excessive.”
“And of course, the irony is that when the former president was silenced, his approval ratings went up. I think that's because people saw the injustice and he followed the script,” Turley continued. “That may have played a role in all of this. Marchan actually saw how his conduct at the trial, the trial itself, worked in Trump's favor. That would have been nothing compared to what would have happened if he had put Trump on house arrest or in prison. I think Marchan realized that.”
A Manhattan jury found Trump guilty in May of 34 counts of falsifying business records in connection with paying off his then-lawyer Michael Cohen over a non-disclosure agreement with porn actress Stormy Daniels. The former president's sentencing was originally scheduled for July 11, but Judge Marchan postponed it after the Supreme Court ruled on July 1 that he had presidential immunity.
Former federal prosecutor Andrew Cherkasky said Friday that Marchan's decision to postpone sentencing again could “indicate” he plans to jail Trump after the November election.
As an independent, nonpartisan news service, all content produced by the Daily Caller News Foundation is available free of charge to any legitimate news publisher with a large readership. All republished articles must include our logo, reporter byline, and affiliation with the DCNF. If you have any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact us at licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
