The most egregious violations in the New York conviction of former President Donald Trump were federal Constitutional “due process” violations that states are bound to follow. New York did not.
On this basis, Trump should file an emergency petition to the U.S. Supreme Court seeking an injunction (or a stay) to halt imposition of the sentencing currently scheduled for July 11th. The high court could then examine the merits of these due process violations and determine immediately whether the “guilty” verdicts should be reversed.
The Manhattan District attorney, Alvin Bragg, prosecuted Trump on a convoluted legal theory entirely dependent on the commission of a secondary or underlying crime that was never specifically identified. That is, he supposedly falsified business records to commit or conceal another crime that might have been one of several possible “unlawful means” crimes —a federal campaign violation or creation of additional false records or a tax law violation.
Astonishingly, jurors were then allowed to pick or choose for themselves with little guidance. Judge Juan Merchan should never have allowed it. No fair or competent judge would.
Under the Sixth Amendment, all defendants have a right to be informed of the precise “nature and causes of the accusations” against them so that they can properly defend themselves at trial. This did not happen. During the pendency of the trial, the defense never knew what alleged crimes to defend against.
Judge Merchan then compounded this shocking due process violation by instructing the jurors that they did not have to agree unanimously on a singular unlawful act (or secondary crime, if you will). They could freely disagree while still convicting the accused.
The judge’s instructions were defective and wrong. He effectively tore up a fundamental right embedded in Constitutional principles that are derived from the Sixth and Seventh Amendments and made applicable to the states through the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The U.S. Supreme Court has previously held that unanimity extends to all key issues, including every necessary element of a primary crime and, in this case, the establishment of a secondary crime.
While the Supreme Court rarely accepts such emergency injunctions or writs at this early stage, this case is unique. The defendant is the de facto nominee for President of the United States. Imposing a sentence on him a scant four months before the general election will cause him —and potential voters throughout the nation— irreparable harm by unduly influencing the election that arose from these flagrant due process violations.
The same judge who sanctioned the violations will soon levy a sentence that may well further restrict —beyond the current gag order— Trump’s ability to campaign for the highest office. This not only infringes severely on his free speech rights but on the free speech rights of voters to hear what he has to say. The First Amendment protects both speaker and listener.
On this basis, Trump’s lawyers must file an emergency petition directly to the U.S. Supreme Court. The normal appellate process that may take months or even years to perfect is not a viable option.
Exigent circumstances merit extraordinary relief by the nation’s highest court.
The post Trump Should File Emergency Petition to Supreme Court to Halt the Sentencing in His NY Case appeared first on Gregg Jarrett.
Click this link for the original source of this article.
Author: Gregg Jarrett
This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, https://thegreggjarrett.com and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact USSANews.com using the email address in the Contact page found in the website menu.