On January 10, US president-elect Donald Trump officially became a convicted felon as New York judge Juan Merchan sentenced him on 34 counts of falsifying business records to disguise “hush money” payments to porn star Stormy Daniels as legal expenses.

The sentencing followed a 5-4 Supreme Court rejection of Trump’s request that it intervene to postpone the sentencing. That the vote went 5-4 instead of 9-0 constitutes a far greater scandal than anything Trump stands convicted of.

Most elements of the case against Trump — the payments to Daniels before he was elected in 2016, and the charges and trial after he left office in 2021 — relate to periods of time when he was not president.

Even the part that relates to the period of time when he WAS president — his reimbursement, disguised as “legal expenses,” to the attorney who acted as cut-out for the hush money — didn’t concern any “official act” of the presidency conferring immunity for such per last July’s Supreme Court ruling (which itself lacked any convincing constitutional justification).

In effect, the four dissenting justices claim that anyone who has ever been president of the United States should enjoy life-long immunity from criminal prosecution (at both the federal and state level), even for acts committed outside the scope or time frame of that person’s presidency.

So, what were those four justices trying to save Trump from?

The sentence included no prison time, no fine, and no probation requirements.  Merchan’s “unconditional discharge” consisted entirely of entering the convictions into the public record.

That doesn’t mean the convictions bring no consequences.

Under New York law, felons must provide DNA samples to law enforcement.

Under New Jersey law, Trump’s golf courses may lose their liquor licenses.

Under (unconstitutional) federal law, Trump may no longer possess firearms.

And some countries’ regimes deny entry to convicted felons, which in theory could impede his ability, even as president, to visit those countries.

It could have … and, for anyone not named “Donald Trump,” likely would have … been far worse.  He faced, among other possible consequences, up to 20 years in prison.

On the other hand, it seems unlikely that anyone not named “Donald Trump” would have faced prosecution over the matter, or that even he himself would have faced prosecution if he’d lost the 2016 presidential election and faded into obscurity.

Whatever Trump may be wrong about, he’s right that this was all about politics.

And politics makes people — including Supreme Court justices — stupid.

Thomas L. Knapp (X: @thomaslknapp | Bluesky: @knappster.bsky.social | Mastodon: @knappster) is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.

PUBLICATION/CITATION HISTORY