Yale Law Professor Jed Rubenfeld suggested that former President Donald Trump’s legal team, after his guilty verdict in Manhattan, could pursue an appeal through the New York Appeals Court system in an attempt to end up at the Supreme Court. Rubenfeld argued that this process will take years and could result in irreparable harm, especially if the conviction impacts the 2024 presidential election. He pointed to surveys showing that a substantial number of voters would still support Trump even if he is a convicted felon, potentially affecting the outcome of the election.
Rubenfeld proposed that the impact of an unlawful conviction on an election could not be undone, despite a potential reversal on appeal in the future. He suggested that Bragg and Judge Merchan may have unlawfully interfered with the election and decided the outcome through unconstitutional means. Rubenfeld argued that Trump is not yet a convicted felon until the judge enters a judgment of guilt, which is scheduled for July 11. He also mentioned that Trump’s attorneys could potentially sue in federal court and request an emergency temporary restraining order to halt the judgment of guilt until serious constitutional arguments are reviewed.
Rubenfeld expressed concern over the criminal targeting of former presidents, especially in unclear cases, and highlighted the potential dangers of pursuing novel legal theories without clear charges. He emphasized the importance of a federal court reviewing the constitutionality of the prosecution and determining the validity of the charges before the judgment of guilt is entered. Rubenfeld suggested that this could prevent irreparable harm and allow for a ruling from the federal courts, possibly even the Supreme Court, before the next election.
During Trump’s trial in Manhattan, he was found guilty on 34 counts of falsifying business records related to the hush money payment to Stormy Daniels. Trump is scheduled to be sentenced on July 11, potentially facing imprisonment just before the Republican National Convention. Rubenfeld highlighted the need for a transparent and constitutionally sound legal process, especially in cases involving high-profile political figures, to avoid setting dangerous precedents and undermining the integrity of the justice system.
