President-elect Donald Trump’s legal team has launched a robust push to dismiss the case against him in New York v. Trump, citing constitutional protections and arguing that the November election results override the “political motivations” of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg. This move, detailed in a letter from Trump attorney and Deputy Attorney General nominee Todd Blanche to Judge Juan Merchan, sets the stage for a dramatic legal battle in the final weeks before Trump’s inauguration.

Blanche’s letter argues that the case against Trump must be immediately dismissed to preserve constitutional principles and ensure a smooth transition of executive power. Referencing the Presidential Transition Act of 1963 and the Supremacy Clause, Blanche asserted that continuing the case would destabilize the federal government and disrupt Trump’s ability to assume office effectively.

“On November 5, 2024, the Nation’s People issued a mandate that supersedes the political motivations of DANY’s ‘People,’” Blanche wrote, calling the case “politically motivated and fatally flawed.” He emphasized that the federal Constitution grants the president-elect immunity from prosecution for official acts, a doctrine supported by a recent Supreme Court decision.

Blanche also requested a stay on all proceedings until December 20 to allow time for a formal dismissal motion, which Bragg has agreed to in principle. If the court denies the dismissal, Trump’s team plans to appeal and request additional time to seek relief from higher courts. Blanche warned that proceeding with the case would “hamstring the operation of the whole governmental apparatus, both in foreign and domestic affairs.”

Bragg, who previously requested a stay until 2029, remains opposed to dismissal but has signaled a willingness to review the defense’s arguments. His office insists that the trial and Trump’s conviction on 34 counts of falsifying business records were lawful and should stand. The case stems from alleged hush-money payments investigated initially under former DA Cyrus Vance.

Central to Trump’s defense is the Supreme Court’s recent ruling on presidential immunity, which shields former presidents from prosecution for official acts. Blanche contends that Bragg’s use of “official acts evidence” in both the grand jury and trial violated this doctrine. Evidence cited as improper includes testimony from former White House officials, Trump’s communications about FEC inquiries, and disclosures to the Office of Government Ethics.

Blanche argued that these violations tainted the indictment and trial, requiring the case to be dismissed. “Presidents cannot be indicted based on conduct for which they are immune from prosecution,” Blanche wrote, referencing the Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision in a separate case involving Special Counsel Jack Smith.

Trump’s defense team portrays the case as a politically motivated attempt to undermine his presidency, pointing to Bragg’s re-election campaign and broader Democratic opposition. Trump’s allies have interpreted Bragg’s request for a stay as a sign of a faltering prosecution, with one Trump official calling the case “effectively over.”

This high-stakes legal battle occurs against a backdrop of waning cases brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith. Trump has been acquitted or had charges dismissed in several high-profile cases, including one related to classified documents, where a Florida judge ruled Smith’s appointment unlawful.

What’s Next?
Judge Merchan has yet to rule on the immunity argument or the broader dismissal motion. Meanwhile, Trump’s legal team continues to assert that the president-elect’s victory in November reflects the will of the American people, superseding any efforts to prosecute him.