Donald Trump wants to remove judge in New York criminal case
What We Know: The former president is pushing to make Judge Juan Merchan recuse himself from his New York criminal case.
Could it work?
Donald Trump Has Ideas
Former President Donald Trump has never been shy about criticizing the judges in his various criminal cases.
Most recently, he criticized the judge in his civil sexual abuse and defamation trial, Lewis Kaplan, as “Clinton-appointed,” apparently of the belief that only judges that Trump himself appointed can be trusted to fairly preside over his trials.
Now, Trump’s team is trying to remove the judge in another of his New York cases.
According to NBC News, Trump’s attorneys are seeking to remove Judge Juan Merchan, the judge in the ongoing criminal case in New York state court. Trump was indicted this spring on 34 counts of falsifying business records, in relation to the hush money payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels, who alleges that she had an affair with Trump in 2006.
“President Trump, like all Americans, is entitled under the Constitution to an impartial judge and fair legal process,” Trump’s attorneys said in a statement, as cited by NBC. The statement added that Judge Merchan has “significant conflicts” in the case. Those involve Merchan having presided over previous cases involving the Trump Organization, including the one in which Trump’s company was fined $1.6 million.
Per the New York Times, Trump’s attorneys had also sought to remove Merchan from the Trump Organization trial. In addition, Judge Merchan will be the one deciding whether or not he recuses.
The “conflicts” also, per the Times, include Merchan’s daughter’s work for a Democratic consulting firm, and that the daughter “stands to benefit financially from decisions Judge Merchan may make in this case.” But experts quoted by the newspaper doubted that such a conflict would be enough to remove Judge Merchan from the case.
Earlier, Trump’s team had sought to move the case from state to federal court, because it covered actions that took place during Trump’s presidency. However, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg pushed back against that move this week.
Bragg’s office stated that the “alleged criminal conduct had no connection to his official duties and responsibilities as President, but instead arose from his unofficial actions relating to his private businesses and pre-election conduct.”
Last month, Merchan had told Trump and his attorneys in a hearing that they must obey a protective order in relation to how they discuss discovery materials during the trial, although the order is not a full-on gag order. Also, Trump can only view certain discovery materials while in the presence of his lawyers.
“It is not a gag order and it is not my intention to impede Mr. Trump’s ability to campaign,” Judge Merchan had said in the hearing, per NPR. “He is free to deny the [criminal] charges, free to do almost anything not covered in protective order.”
“Defendant’s alleged criminal conduct here is similarly divorced from any official duty or responsibility: the pre-election scheme and $130,000 payment to an adult film actress predated defendant’s inauguration, and his post-inauguration actions all derived from this pre-inauguration conduct,” Bragg’s office added.
That motion will be considered in a June 27 hearing.
Shortly after the indictment, Judge Merchan had told Trump to “please refrain from making statements that are likely to incite violence or civil unrest.”
Trump is scheduled to stand trial in March of 2024, in the New York case, although he could be indicted in multiple other jurisdictions prior to then. That raises the possibility that Trump, who is running for president, might have to leave the campaign trail in order to attend his trial, or other court appearances in different trials.
The former president, on Truth Social, complained about the timing of the scheduled trial.
“Just had New York County Supreme Court hearing where I believe my First Amendment Rights,’ Freedom of Speech,’ have been violated, and they forced upon us a trial date of March 25th, right in the middle of Primary season. Very unfair, but this is exactly what the Radical Left Democrats wanted. It’s called ELECTION INTERFERENCE, and nothing like this has ever happened in our Country before!!!”
From 19FortyFive: Are We Watching the End of Donald Trump?
From 19FortyFive: Liz Cheney: Could She Join the Democratic Party?
From 19FortyFive: Liz Cheney: The Next President of the United States?
Expertise and Experience
Stephen Silver is a Senior Editor for 19FortyFive. He is an award-winning journalist, essayist and film critic, who is also a contributor to the Philadelphia Inquirer, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, Broad Street Review and Splice Today. The co-founder of the Philadelphia Film Critics Circle, Stephen lives in suburban Philadelphia with his wife and two sons. Follow him on Twitter at @StephenSilver.
