President-elect Donald Trump’s New York criminal case was paused Tuesday to determine how the case—and Trump’s sentencing—should move forward following his election, after the three other criminal cases against him were already poised to be killed or delayed for years as he takes office, reflecting how the ex-president’s legal strategy to drag out his prosecutions for as long as possible ultimately kept him from facing most of his criminal charges.
Former President Donald Trump at an election night watch party on Nov. 6 in West Palm Beach, Fla.
Trump’s election was a death knell for the two federal criminal cases against him, as prosecutors are reportedly winding down those investigations, and his criminal case in Georgia is expected to be postponed until at least 2029, leaving Trump’s New York conviction as the only charges against him that are holding up—at least so far—after Trump’s lawyers succeeded in their strategy to delay his cases.
New York Criminal Case: Trump’s criminal case in New York was the only one to go to trial, as he was convicted in May on 34 counts of falsifying business records based on hush money payments made to adult film star Stormy Daniels—but he successfully delayed his sentencing, originally scheduled for July, with Judge Juan Merchan agreeing in September to postpone the sentencing until after the election in order to avoid any perception of political bias.
Merchan then ruled Tuesday to pause deadlines in the case—including a planned ruling on whether to throw out the verdict and Trump’s Nov. 26 sentencing—after prosecutors said they needed to evaluate how the case should move forward in light of Trump’s election, with Merchan giving them until Nov. 19 to file an explanation of how they want the case to proceed.
Federal Election Case: Trump was indicted in Aug. 2023 for trying to overturn the 2020 election, and though the case was originally scheduled to go to trial in March, the proceedings were paused when Trump asked for the charges to be thrown out because he has presidential immunity—a request the Supreme Court granted in part in July, after the issue took seven months to play out, forcing prosecutors to retool the indictment.
After it resumed—already too late to go to trial before Election Day—Special Counsel Jack Smith prolonged the case further by asking for some time to figure out how to proceed and filing a new indictment, and Judge Tanya Chutkan pushed back some deadlines in the debate over which charges against Trump can move forward, which ensured there wouldn’t be a ruling even on just that issue alone until after the election.
Federal Documents Case: Trump was indicted in June 2023 for allegedly withholding White House documents and obstructing the government’s investigation into them, and the case was assigned to Trump-appointed U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, who already had a reputation for being deferential to Trump in the investigation that led up to his indictment.
While Cannon originally scheduled the case to go to trial in May, Trump filed a number of motions trying to drag out the case that Cannon slow-walked ruling on, with the judge ultimately ruling in May to suspend the trial indefinitely while issues were still pending—and then dismissing the charges entirely in July, ruling Smith was unlawfully appointed, though the special counsel asked an appeals court to take up the case.
Georgia Election Case: Trump and his allies were indicted in August 2023 for their efforts to overturn the 2020 election, and while a trial date for Trump was not set in the case, Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis asked for a trial to take place in August—before Trump and his co-defendants asked for Willis to be disqualified from the case over her romantic relationship with lead prosecutor Nathan Wade.
While a court ruled in March that Willis could stay on the case—but Wade had to resign—the case is still on pause while an appeals court considers the issue, which they won’t hear until December, and while Trump can’t get out of state charges as president, it’s expected the court will pause the criminal case against him until after he leaves office.
It’s unclear how the hush money case will play out until prosecutors say by Nov. 19 how they want to proceed. Trump has asked for the verdict to be thrown out based on the Supreme Court’s ruling in the federal election case giving him immunity from prosecution based on any of his official acts in office. (While the charges against Trump concern conduct based on his 2016 campaign, his lawyers argue some of the evidence should not have been allowed to be used at trial.) His lawyers also said in an email to Merchan made public Tuesday that they believe Trump’s case should also be thrown out because of his election, arguing getting rid of the conviction is “necessary to avoid unconstitutional impediments to Trump’s ability to govern.” If Merchan still rules the conviction can move forward, it then remains to be seen whether Trump’s sentencing would take place before Inauguration Day, even as the judge’s Tuesday ruling pausing the case postponed the planned Nov. 26 sentencing date. Legal experts predicted to Politico before Merchan paused the case that the sentencing will get called off, but it’s ultimately up to the judge to decide, and will also depend on how prosecutors want the case to move forward. Even if Trump is sentenced before taking office, it’s likely he would be allowed to wait to carry out his sentence until after he leaves the White House.
Smith is expected to end the federal government’s two criminal cases against Trump in the coming months before Inauguration Day, though it’s still unclear how he’ll do it. The special counsel asked Chutkan last week to postpone deadlines in the federal election case while he decides how to proceed, with a status report due on Dec. 2 that will lay out his plans. He has not yet filed anything in the ongoing appeal in the federal documents case, but is likely to end that prosecution as well, as he said in his letter to Chutkan the Justice Department will be following its policy of not prosecuting sitting presidents. While the Georgia case is still on pause, multiple reports suggest Trump’s lawyers are preparing to ask the court to have the case dismissed against him entirely on the basis of him becoming president, though it remains to be seen how that will play out.
Unlike Trump’s federal criminal charges, the civil cases playing out against Trump—including in federal court—aren’t expected to be impacted by his election, as Supreme Court precedent in Clinton v. Jones found sitting presidents can still be held liable in civil court for actions before they took office. That means writer E. Jean Carroll’s two defamation cases against Trump, as well as the civil fraud case against Trump and his business associates, will not be impacted, as Trump appeals the rulings against him in those cases. It also means if the appeals court upholds the decisions, Trump will also still be liable for the more than $90 million he owes in Carroll’s two cases and more than $470 million—and counting—in the civil fraud case. Trump is also being sued in civil court by Democratic lawmakers and Capitol police officers for his role in the Jan. 6 riot, and judges have already ruled he is not immune from those lawsuits.
What will happen to the players involved with Trump’s legal cases once he takes office. Trump has vowed “retribution” against his political enemies when he retakes the White House, and has singled out Smith as someone he wants revenge against, threatening to deport the special counsel even though he is not an immigrant. Others involved with Trump’s cases who he’s attacked and could try to retaliate against include Carroll, Merchan and Willis, as well as New York Attorney General Letitia James and New York Judge Arthur Engoron, who brought and adjudicated the civil fraud case, respectively. On the flip side, Cannon may be rewarded by a future President Trump, as he’s repeatedly praised the judge for the favorable rulings she’s issued in the documents case. ABC News reported before the election Cannon was on Trump’s short list for attorney general, and it’s also been floated that she could get a more prestigious judicial appointment, including being a contender for the Supreme Court.