Trump Lawyers Demand Immediate Dismissal of NY Case, Call Charges ‘Politically Motivated Witch Hunt’

Lawyers for President-elect Donald Trump have filed a motion to dismiss the charges against him in the controversial New York v. Trump case, calling it a politically motivated attack and a misuse of the justice system.

The legal team urged the court to act swiftly, describing the charges as part of a “failed lawfare” campaign that should have never made it to trial.

In their filing, Trump’s attorneys leaned heavily on constitutional arguments, asserting that the Presidential immunity doctrine, the Presidential Transition Act, and the Supremacy Clause necessitate immediate dismissal.

Former U.S. President Donald Trump speaks alongside his attorney, Todd Blanche, as he arrives for his hush money trial at Manhattan Criminal Court on May 30, 2024, in New York City. (Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)

The motion cited President Joe Biden’s recent actions, including his unconditional pardon of his son, Hunter Biden, as evidence of selective and politically charged prosecutions.

“Yesterday, in issuing a 10-year pardon to Hunter Biden that covers any crimes whether charged or uncharged, President Biden argued his son had been ‘selectively, and unfairly, prosecuted,’” the motion reads. “This is the same DOJ that targeted President Trump in politically motivated, election-interference witch hunts.”

Trump spokesman and incoming White House communications director Steven Cheung called the motion a “powerhouse” filing that underscores the unconstitutionality of the Manhattan District Attorney’s case. He urged the court to dismiss the charges and allow Trump to focus on the critical responsibilities of transitioning back into the presidency.

The charges against Trump stem from allegations of falsifying business records tied to hush money payments during his first term. After a six-week trial, a jury convicted Trump on 34 counts of falsifying records in the first degree.

FILE – Judge Juan M. Merchan poses in his chambers in New York, March 14, 2024. (AP Photo/Seth Wenig, File)

Trump’s legal team has argued these charges are based on a “contrived and defective” legal theory and that the Manhattan DA’s office pursued them solely to undermine Trump politically.

The motion characterised Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg’s actions as “precisely the type of political theatre” President Biden condemned in his statement about Hunter Biden’s pardon. Trump’s attorneys accused Bragg of prioritising this case over addressing violent crime in New York City and suggested the case is emblematic of a broken and biased system.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg arrives at Daniel Penny’s trial following a lunch break at the Manhattan Supreme Criminal Court building in New York City on Monday, Dec. 2, 2024. (Julia Bonavita/Fox News Digital)

Central to Trump’s argument is that presidents are shielded from prosecution for actions taken during or related to their official duties. The legal team warned that proceeding with the case could disrupt Trump’s ability to govern during his second term, infringing on the federal government’s functionality and violating the Supremacy Clause.

The motion also dismissed Bragg’s suggestion to pause the case until the end of Trump’s presidency as unconstitutional and unrealistic. Trump’s lawyers argued that reviving the case after over a decade would be a gross misuse of judicial resources and a clear violation of due process.

Donald Trump waves to supporters in West Palm Beach, Florida. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

This filing follows a series of recent legal victories for Trump, including the dismissal of federal charges related to January 6 and classified records cases by Special Counsel Jack Smith. Trump’s attorneys noted these developments as proof of the politically motivated nature of the legal challenges against him.

As the legal battle unfolds, the decision now rests with Judge Juan Merchan, who will determine whether to dismiss the case or allow it to proceed. Trump’s team maintains that dismissal is the only path consistent with the Constitution and necessary to prevent further division and disruption in the country.