Supreme Court May Have Given Trump NY Trial 'Greatest Indictment'—Attorney

Professor of public interest law at George Washington University Law School Jonathan Turley testifies during a hearing before the House Judiciary Committee at Rayburn House Office Building June 30, 2021 in Washington, DC. On Saturday, Turley authored an op-ed in The Hill making the argument that two recent Supreme Court rulings "defended the rights of defendants" unlike in Donald Trump's hush money trial in Manhattan last month.

Legal analyst and attorney Jonathan Turley wrote on Saturday that "the greatest indictment" in Donald Trump's criminal hush money trial "may have come from the Supreme Court" after two rulings this week were in favor of the defendants.

On Saturday, Turley, a frequent Fox News commentator and professor at George Washington University Law School, authored an opinion piece titled, "At the Supreme Court, two cases lay bare New York's legal wasteland," published in The Hill. The piece comes nearly a month after a Manhattan jury convicted Trump and days after the Supreme Court ruled on the cases Gonzalez v. TrevinoandErlinger v. United States.

Late last month, a New York jury found Trump, the presumptive Republican 2024 presidential nominee, guilty on 34 counts of falsifying business records relating to a hush money payment made to adult film star Stormy Daniels before the 2016 presidential election. Daniels alleged she had a sexual encounter with Trump in 2006, which he denies. Trump has maintained his innocence and says the case is politically motivated. His legal team says it will fight the case, which will include an appeal, if necessary.

The verdict makes Trump the first former president convicted of felony crimes. He now faces possible jail time, which will be determined at his July 11 sentencing by Judge Juan Merchan, just days before the Republican National Convention where he's expected to accept the party's nomination.

In his opinion piece, Turley described what he believes is a siloed "legal wasteland" in New York, writing, "With the Trump trial, Manhattan has become a type of legal wilderness where prosecutors use the legal system to hunt down political rivals and thrill their own supporters."

In an email to Newsweek on Sunday morning, Turley said in response to Trump's trial, "My greatest objection was the [jury] instruction allowing for a nonunanimous decision on the secondary crime that was critical in reviving the dead misdemeanor office on the falsification of business records."

In his opinion piece, Turley turned to Washington, D.C., for comparison and wrote, "The Supreme Court, with a strong conservative majority, defended the rights of defendants and upheld core principles that are being systematically gutted in New York."

In an X, formerly Twitter, post discussing his article, Turley wrote Saturday about the Manhattan trial, "Yet, the greatest indictment may have come from the Supreme Court."

Gonzalez v. Trevino

Turley looked at the highest Court's Thursday ruling on Gonzalez v. Trevino,in which Sylvia Gonzalez, a former Castle Hills, Texas, city council member, claims her 2019 arrest on charges that she tampered with government records was in retaliation for her criticism of the city manager. The Court's ruling grants Gonzalez another opportunity to pursue her retaliation claim in a lower court, stating that the lower court had an "overly cramped view" of a key precedent case.

"Unlike the Trump case, the criminal charges against Gonzales were thrown out before trial. For Trump, selective prosecution claims were summarily dismissed, even though no case like Bragg's appears to have ever been brought before," Turley wrote in his opinion article.

Selective prosecution means prosecuting only one defendant when there are others who are similarly situated, but are not facing prosecution.

Erlinger v. United States

Citing a second Supreme Court case in his Saturday opinion article, Erlinger v. United States, the Court ruled on Friday that "the Fifth and Sixth Amendments require a unanimous jury to make the determination beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant's past offenses were committed on separate occasions." The case dealt with unlawful possession of a firearm as a felon with prior burglaries.

"The court ruled that a jury had to decide this issue unanimously under a standard of beyond reasonable doubt. This is in contrast to how the Trump case was handled, in which jurors could disagree on key aspects of the crime yet still convict the defendant," Turley wrote, referring to Merchan's jury instructions that informed the jury they needed to unanimously find Trump guilty of each of the 34 felony counts, but did not need to be unanimous on the specific ways the law was allegedly broken.

"They could split 4-4-4 on the secondary crime motivating the misdemeanors and just declare that some secondary crime was involved," Turley added.

Turley concluded his opinion article and wrote, "Gonzales and Erlinger demonstrate the high level of protections that we normally afford criminal defendants. A court with a 6-3 conservative majority just ruled for the rights of all defendants in defense of the rule of law."

Views

Cheryl Bader, an associate clinical professor of law at Fordham University, previously told Newsweek in an email that Merchan's instructions mean that the jurors "all need to agree on the verdict, but they can get to that result through different paths and reasoning."

She added: "This is not an unusual concept in criminal law, particularly in the case of conspiracy."

With regards to the future of Trump's potential appeal of the verdict, Turley told Newsweekon Sunday, "While I expect former President Trump will have initial difficulty in the New York system, I still believe that the verdict should and will eventually be set aside."

Newsweek has reached out to several other legal analysts for comment via email on Sunday.

Related Articles

• Jack Smith Doesn't 'Mince Words' in New Aileen Cannon Motion—Legal Analyst
• Trump-Endorsed Trent Staggs Chances of Beating GOP Rivals in Utah: Polls
• Mark Cuban's Post Critical of Republican Party Takes Off Online

Start your unlimited Newsweek trial