In a dramatic twist following President-elect Donald Trump’s monumental victory, Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan is expected to announce next week whether he’ll let Trump’s felony conviction stand—or bow to the overwhelming mandate of the American people.
Judge Merchan, who oversaw Trump’s contentious “hush money” trial, had previously delayed sentencing by over four months, curiously opting to wait until after the election. Now, with Trump securing the White House once again, the legal calculus has changed entirely, putting Trump’s defense team in a position of remarkable strength. Trump’s team is making it clear: they’re determined to ensure this case ends here and that sentencing “never happens,” as CNN’s chief legal correspondent Paula Reid noted.
“Now that Trump is president-elect, his legal team will argue that he’s entitled to the same constitutional protections as a sitting president and should be shielded from state prosecutors,” Reid reported. This argument isn’t baseless—it echoes the long-standing debate over whether a president should face state-level legal challenges while preparing to take office. With the public mandate behind him and the legal support he’s accrued, Trump’s team has every reason to push hard against further legal entanglements.
The case in question involves Trump’s alleged payments to adult film actress Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election, with 34 counts of felony falsifying business records that could carry up to four years in prison. But few legal experts actually expect a conviction of this nature to result in jail time. “Judge Merchan doesn’t have the stomach to imprison a former president or president-elect,” former prosecutor Neama Rahmani commented, adding, “Now that Trump has won, his criminal problems go away.”
Trump’s supporters see this development as part of a broader vindication. They view this case as a politically motivated attempt to derail a candidate who resonated with millions of Americans tired of establishment games. Now, Merchan’s decision looms large as a bellwether for whether the justice system can remain fair in the face of intense political bias.
For many, the timing of Merchan’s decision and the original delay of sentencing raise serious questions about judicial impartiality. The Trump team is likely to argue that the charges were nothing more than a political maneuver aimed at influencing the election. With Trump’s landslide victory, that argument has new weight—and Justice Merchan now finds himself under intense scrutiny.
As Reid noted, Trump’s team will likely invoke the idea that a president-elect deserves constitutional protection from state interference, a notion that has both legal merit and historical precedent. If Merchan does decide to dismiss the charges, it would set a powerful standard affirming the office of the presidency as above politically motivated local prosecutions.
Whether the left likes it or not, the message from the voters was clear: they believe in Trump and are rejecting the relentless attacks on him. Trump’s legal challenges have become emblematic of the media and judicial system’s attempts to undermine his popularity and reputation. Yet every attempt to bring him down seems only to make him stronger, bolstering his support among everyday Americans.
As the nation awaits Judge Merchan’s decision, one thing is clear—Trump’s victory has sent a message to the entire political establishment. The American people have chosen their leader, and they won’t allow a politically-motivated conviction to taint the will of the voters. For now, Justice Merchan has a choice to make: follow the will of the people or perpetuate what many see as a politically driven charade. Either way, history will remember his decision as part of a much larger story—one that reaffirms or challenges the integrity of America’s judicial system.
