Manhattan DA and Ethics Committee Defend Judge in Trump’s Hush-Money Case, Cite No Bias Evidence

48

Despite Donald Trump’s vehement objections, Manhattan prosecutors assert that neither the former president nor his legal team has produced any substantial evidence to validate their accusations of bias against the judge presiding over his hush-money lawsuit. Consequently, they urge him to dismiss defense calls for his recusal.

Court documents, made public on Tuesday, showed the Manhattan district attorney’s office supporting Judge Juan Manuel Merchan amidst Trump’s allegations of his being prejudiced against Trump. This reinforces a recent pronouncement by a court ethics committee, stating that a judge in his position would not be required to recuse himself.

The state’s Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics issued the statement on May 4, implying that Merchan might have sought their advice, given the significant role he plays in the case and potential perceptions of bias or conflict of interest. Although the advisory did not name specific individuals, the details align with the circumstances of the case.

Trump’s legal team argues that Merchan, a state court judge in Manhattan, is biased because his daughter is a political consultant for several of Trump’s Democratic adversaries. They also point to his past rulings in two other Trump-related cases as evidence of pro-prosecution bias.

However, the Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics concluded that a judge in such a situation could continue presiding over the case, provided they believe they can remain fair and impartial.

Senior counsel to District Attorney Alvin Bragg, Matthew Colangelo, agreed that neither issue warranted Merchan’s recusal. He characterized Trump’s motion for recusal as part of a pattern of groundlessly accusing state and federal judges nationwide of bias.

The decision to recuse lies solely with Merchan, who has previously dismissed a similar request during the trial of Trump’s company, the Trump Organization.

Additionally, Trump’s lawyers are pushing to transfer the case to federal court, thereby removing Merchan from the proceedings. A hearing on this request has been scheduled for June 27 by a federal judge.

Commenting on the case, court spokesperson Lucian Chalfen stated: “As this case remains a pending matter before Judge Merchan, we have no further comment.”

In other news, on Tuesday, prosecutors responded to efforts by Trump’s legal team to resist two subpoenas, including one for a full deposition transcript connected to a lawsuit that saw Trump face a $5 million judgement for sexual abuse and defamation. Prosecutors deemed the full deposition transcript and video as clearly relevant to their case.

Trump, who faces 34 felony counts for falsifying business records related to hush-money payments during the 2016 campaign, has pleaded not guilty. He has also denied allegations of having extramarital affairs. This New York case is one of two criminal cases against Trump.

In defense of Merchan, Colangelo argued that recusal is only mandated when there is a direct, personal, substantial, or financial interest in a particular conclusion. He stated that Merchan’s daughter working for Trump’s political adversaries did not fall into these categories.

Trump’s lawyers also questioned Merchan about three political donations totalling $35 made in his name to Democratic causes during the 2020 election. The judge has yet to respond.

The Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics argued that such minor contributions, even to a defendant’s political opponent, would not compel a judge to recuse himself.

“Modest political contributions made more than two years ago cannot reasonably create an impression of bias or favoritism in the case before the judge,” the panel stated.

The case was assigned to Merchan due to a rotation system where judges supervising grand juries oversee cases stemming from those juries, according to the court system. Merchan, who frequently presides over financial cases and heads Manhattan’s mental health court, provides some defendants with the opportunity to resolve their cases with treatment and supervision.