CENTER MARKET— Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg said Tuesday that his office will oppose President-elect Donald Trump’s motion to throw out his felony conviction in New York.

Bragg said this despite plans to oppose it Trump’s motionhis office would agree to stay proceedings pending the judge’s decision on Trump’s motion to dismiss. Bragg also suggested that the case could wait until Trump finishes his term in the White House.

“No current law provides that a president’s temporary immunity from prosecution requires the dismissal of a post-trial criminal proceeding that was commenced at a time when the defendant was not immune from prosecution and that is based on off-the-record conduct for which the defendant is not either. immune,” Bragg wrote in a letter to Judge Juan Merchan. “Rather, existing law suggests that the court must balance competing constitutional interests and proceed “in a manner that preserves both the independence of the executive and the integrity of the criminal justice system.”

In late May, a Manhattan jury condemned Trump in all respects in the case of “quiet money”. Trump was convicted of 34 counts of falsifying business records for disguising hush money payments to an adult film actress as legal costs before the 2016 election. Under New York state law, falsifying business records in the first degree is a Class E felony with a maximum penalty of four years in prison.

Trump and his lawyers want the judge to dismiss the case based on the US Supreme Court’s immunity ruling. In July, the US Supreme Court ruled that presidents and former presidents have absolute immunity for actions related to basic constitutional powers and presumptive immunity for official actions. The ruling says the president does not have immunity for non-official conduct.

Bragg said Tuesday that the case could remain on hold until the end of Trump’s second term. Trump beat the vice president Kamala Harris in the two-way race for the White House. It will be inaugurated on January 20, 2025.

“Given the need to balance competing constitutional interests, consideration should be given to various non-dismissal options that may address any concerns raised by the pendency of a post-trial criminal proceeding during the presidency, such as delaying all remaining criminal proceedings until after the end of the defendant’s upcoming presidential term,” Bragg wrote.

Originally published by The Center Square.