NEW YORK — President-elect Donald Trump’s sentencing for his New York hush-money conviction is scheduled for Friday, following the Supreme Court’s decision against intervention. This unprecedented situation, unfolding in a Manhattan courtroom, was unthinkable just a few years ago. A state judge will determine the consequences for the former and soon-to-be president, following his felony conviction.
Ten days before his inauguration, Judge Juan M. Merchan has signaled his intent to issue an unconditional discharge—meaning no jail time, probation, or fines—a sentence the prosecution isn’t contesting. However, the final decision rests on Friday’s proceedings.
Regardless of the outcome, Trump will be the first person with a felony conviction to assume the presidency.
Trump, anticipated to appear via video from Mar-a-Lago, will have the opportunity to address the court. He has consistently denounced the case, the only one of his four indictments to go to trial.
The judge’s planned unconditional discharge, unusual in felony cases, aims to avoid complex constitutional questions that would arise from a sentence overlapping with his presidency.
The hush-money case centered on allegations of falsified business records to conceal a $130,000 payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels, made late in the 2016 campaign to prevent her from disclosing an alleged sexual encounter a decade prior. Trump denies the encounter and attributes the prosecution to political opponents.
“I never falsified business records. It is a fake, made up charge,” the Republican president-elect posted on Truth Social. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, a Democrat, brought the charges.
Bragg’s office stated in a court filing that Trump committed “serious offenses that caused extensive harm to the sanctity of the electoral process and to the integrity of New York’s financial marketplace.”
While the charges focused on financial records, the underlying accusations involved alleged extramarital affairs. Prosecutors argued the payment to Daniels, facilitated by Trump’s then-attorney Michael Cohen, aimed to prevent voters from learning about these alleged affairs.
Trump denies the alleged encounters. His lawyers contend the payments were to protect his family, not his campaign. They maintain that the reimbursement to Cohen for paying Daniels was accurately recorded as legal expenses.
“There was nothing else it could have been called,” he wrote on Truth Social, adding, “I was hiding nothing.”
Trump’s lawyers unsuccessfully attempted to prevent the trial. Following his May conviction on 34 counts of falsifying business records, they pursued various legal avenues to overturn the conviction, dismiss the case, or postpone sentencing.
They presented arguments to Judge Merchan, New York appeals courts, and federal courts, including the Supreme Court. They emphasized claims of presidential immunity, supported by a Supreme Court decision granting former presidents significant immunity.
Trump was a private citizen and presidential candidate when Daniels was paid in 2016. He was president when the reimbursements to Cohen were made and recorded the following year.
His defense argued that immunity should have excluded certain evidence, like testimony about conversations with then-White House communications director Hope Hicks.
After Trump’s November election win, his lawyers argued the case should be dropped to avoid interfering with his presidency and transition.
Judge Merchan, a Democrat, repeatedly delayed sentencing, originally scheduled for July. Last week, he set Friday’s date, citing the need for “finality,” aiming to balance Trump’s governing responsibilities, the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling, the jury verdict, and the principle that “no one is above the law.”
Trump’s lawyers made last-minute attempts to block sentencing. Their final appeal ended Thursday night with a 5-4 Supreme Court decision against a delay.
Meanwhile, other criminal cases against Trump have concluded or stalled before trial. Following Trump’s election, special counsel Jack Smith closed the federal investigations into Trump’s handling of classified documents and attempts to overturn the 2020 election results. A Georgia state-level election interference case is currently uncertain following the removal of prosecutor Fani Willis.