Supreme Court Rejects Trump’s Bid to Delay Sentencing in Hush Money Case
The ruling marks a rare departure for the conservative-leaning Supreme Court, with Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, and three liberal justices forming the majority, while four conservative justices dissented.
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court has cleared the way for President-elect Donald Trump’s sentencing in a New York criminal case tied to hush money payments, denying his request to block the proceedings. The decision means the hearing scheduled for Friday will move forward as planned.
In a narrow 5-4 ruling, the court issued an unsigned order stating that the issues raised by Trump’s legal team could be addressed on appeal. The majority noted that the burden on Trump was minimal, given that the sentencing does not include prison time.
The decision is a rare break for the conservative-leaning court, which had previously handed Trump two major victories in unrelated cases last year. The justices in the majority included Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, and the court’s three liberal members. Four conservative justices dissented.
Speaking to reporters at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida, Trump called the ruling “fair” but reiterated his belief that the case is politically motivated. “We’re going to appeal anyway, just psychologically, because frankly, it’s a disgrace,” he said.
The case stems from payments made during Trump’s 2016 campaign, which prosecutors allege were intended to silence claims that could have damaged his presidential bid. Trump has denied any wrongdoing and dismissed the legal proceedings as an attempt to undermine him politically.
Despite the Supreme Court’s decision, Trump indicated he would continue to fight the case. “For the sake and sanctity of the Presidency, I will be appealing this case, and I am confident that JUSTICE WILL PREVAIL,” he wrote in a post on his Truth Social platform.
Legal experts say that while Trump can pursue appeals, Friday’s sentencing represents a significant milestone in a case that has shadowed his political career. Trump’s lawyers had warned in court filings that allowing the hearing to proceed would cause “grave injustice and harm” to the presidency, but the court appeared unpersuaded.
This latest legal hurdle comes as Trump prepares to take office on Jan. 20, following his re-election. The case adds another layer of scrutiny to a high-stakes moment in American politics, with Trump balancing the responsibilities of a returning presidency against the ongoing legal challenges he faces.
