Trump Trials update for 01-13-2025

Here's the script:

It's been a tumultuous few days for President-elect Donald Trump. On Thursday evening, the Supreme Court cleared the way for Trump's criminal sentencing to proceed in his New York hush money case. Trump had urged the court to halt the sentencing, arguing that as president-elect, he is entitled to immunity from criminal proceedings. However, the justices rejected his plea in a brief unsigned order.

The case revolves around Trump's conviction on 34 counts of falsifying business records to hide reimbursements made to adult film star Stormy Daniels. The trial judge, Juan Merchan, has indicated that he does not intend to sentence Trump to jail time and is allowing Trump to appear by video at the sentencing hearing.

Trump's request to block the sentencing was denied by a 5-4 vote, with Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett joining the court's three liberal justices in voting to allow the sentencing to proceed. Four conservative justices - Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh - indicated that they would have granted Trump's request.

The Supreme Court's decision came after a New York appeals court judge also rejected Trump's request to block the sentencing. Trump had argued that requiring him to prepare for a criminal sentencing while preparing to take office as president imposes an intolerable and unconstitutional burden on him.

However, New York prosecutors countered that Trump's suggestion that he should not be sentenced because he is the president-elect is baseless. They added that the evidence of Trump's guilt was overwhelming and that a jury would have found him guilty even without the evidence that he now claims was based on his official acts as president.

The Supreme Court's order noted that Trump's complaints regarding the use of evidence of his allegedly official acts could be addressed on appeal. It also stated that the burden that sentencing will impose on the president-elect's responsibilities is relatively insubstantial in light of the trial court's stated intent to impose a sentence of unconditional discharge after a brief virtual hearing.

The drama surrounding Trump's sentencing has also raised questions about the impartiality of Justice Samuel Alito. It was reported that Trump spoke with Alito about one of Alito's former law clerks, William Levi, who is seeking a job in the new administration. Alito maintained that he had not discussed Trump's request or any other Supreme Court cases with Trump. However, Rep. Jamie Raskin, a Democrat from Maryland, called on Alito to recuse himself, citing the need for impartial justice under the Constitution.