Share this @internewscast.com
Former U.S. President Donald Trump. (GDA via AP Images)
Former President Donald Trump plans to file a second motion to recuse the judge in charge of his New York City hush money case.
Several references to “recusal” are mentioned in a 13-page opposition brief filed by Trump’s attorneys late Monday. The brief itself largely aims to refute claims made by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg that Trump has violated a limited gag order issued in the case by New York Supreme Court Justice Juan M. Merchan in late March.
“Along with this opposition brief, President Trump is simultaneously submitting a pre-motion letter seeking leave to file a recusal motion based on changed circumstances and newly discovered evidence,” a footnote appended to the first instance of “recusal” explains.
The 45th president’s attorneys must seek leave from Merchan to challenge the judge’s authority to oversee the case due to an earlier court ruling intended to tamp down on the number of docket entries. In that order, Merchan expressed disdain for defense efforts to increasingly delay the proceedings. In turn, he instructed both the defense and the state to file a one-page letter explaining why they needed to file any given motion before filing any additional motions.
When Trump’s defense motion for recusal is filed, the effort appears likely to be a reprise in both form and substance of a June 2023 attempt to have Merchan tossed from the case due to his daughter’s activities as a Democratic Party-affiliated political consultant.
In May 2023, an Empire State court ethics panel found Merchan’s “impartiality cannot reasonably be questioned” because of his daughter’s “business and/or political activities” and that he was “not ethically required to disclose them.” The judge issued his own ruling in August 2023, finding that “recusal would not be in the public interest” and that he was “certain in [his] ability to be fair and impartial.”
In court filings Friday and Monday, Bragg’s office argued Trump had violated the gag order by attacking Merchan’s daughter on social media. And, in the alternative, the state argued the gag order should be explicitly expanded to prohibit attacks on the judge’s family.
Trump attorney Todd Blanche rubbished those notions as entirely off-base and unsupported by both the text and subtext of the gag order.
“The March 26, 2024 opinion indicates that the Court was aware of prior public statements by President Trump relating to Your Honor’s daughter, as relevant to the recusal issue, but the Court did not extend the gag order as the People suggest,” the defense filing reads. “No violation has occurred, much less a violation of a clearly expressed and unequivocal mandate. Therefore, there is no basis for the disingenuous contempt warning proposed by the People.”
On Friday, Bragg suggested sanctions for Trump under an Empire State law that calls for a $1,000 fine and/or up to 30 days in jail. On Monday, Bragg referenced numerous Truth Social media posts.
Trump has trained his sights on Merchan’s daughter due, in part, to her documented support for the Democratic Party. While the district attorney’s office calls this alleged motivating factor a “false claim,” Merchan’s daughter is, in fact, a Democratic Party-aligned consultant who heads Authentic Campaigns. The company has previously worked for prominent Democrats, including President Joe Biden.
Bragg’s filing also references the confusion over an X (formerly Twitter) account that recently used an image of Trump behind bars as its profile picture — but which changed its profile picture after being identified and attacked by Trump. The defendant alleges that the account belongs to Merchan’s daughter; the New York court system claims that the account no longer belongs to her; the district attorney’s office claims the entire episode was “a fraudulent impersonation.”
In their motion previewing the recusal motion — which is technically intended to respond to the state’s gag order violation arguments — the defense sticks to their position that Merchan’s daughter, at the very least, deserves some scrutiny over the X account profile picture flap.
“President Trump’s social media posts amplified defense arguments regarding the need for recusal that have been, and will continue to be, the subject of motion practice,” the defense filing continues. “The posts also addressed specific political opponents who are clients of Authentic, where Your Honor’s daughter is a partner and executive, and responded to media reports regarding a social media account attributed to Your Honor’s daughter.”
“President Trump’s comments concerning Your Honor’s daughter are, properly understood, a criticism of the Court’s prior decision not to recuse itself,” the defense argues. “The People’s attempted distinction between criticisms of Your Honor — which are fully protected by the First and Sixth Amendments, as explained by the D.C. Circuit, and not covered by the gag order — and references to family members of the Court is thus illusory, because one legitimate and constitutionally protected criticism of the Court relates to the Court’s failure to recuse notwithstanding one member of the Court’s immediate family having a financial interest in all ongoing attacks on President Trump, including this case, by virtue of her senior role at Authentic. Thus, extending the gag order to the Court’s family would necessarily extend the gag order to cover the Court itself.”
