Trump’s criminal sentencing postponed until September after Supreme Court rules he can do whatever he wants

Just one day after the Supreme Court declare that presidents are above the law and can essentially commit any crimes they want as long as those crimes are part of their “official” duties, a Manhattan judge delayed Donald Trumpcriminal sentencing in New York hush money case. That sentencing was scheduled for July 11, and now won’t happen until September 18. Pretty sweet deal for this former employee!

In late May, Trump guilty of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to conceal payments to porn star Storm Daniels on the eve of the 2016 election. At the time, it seemed like perhaps the only criminal case against the former president that would lead to real accountability, since the others—the federal cases over election interference and classified documents, as well as the Georgia election case—would likely not go to trial until at least after November, if they ever went to trial. But thanks to the Supreme Court, that small measure of accountability may soon disappear, thanks to the absolutely insane ruling that presidents are “immune” from prosecution for official acts performed while in office—including, as the Justice Department Sonia Sotomayor warned in his dissent, such an act would be like ordering SEAL Team 6 to “assassinate a political opponent.” (To be clear, there is nothing in the Constitution that grants the president the powers of a king—no, worthy of an emperor; the Court’s conservative justices simply decided to overturn some 250 years of history because they appeared to be sympathetic to a man who had vowed to become a “dictator” from the first day of his potential second term.)

Hours after the Court’s ruling, Trump’s lawyers sent a letter to Juan Commerce, judge overseeing hush money case, ask to ask permission to file a motion to vacate the guilty verdict and to delay sentencing while that request is considered. Prosecutors did not oppose the request, and Merchan granted it Tuesday afternoon.

You might wonder how Trump could use Monday’s Supreme Court ruling, which dealt with acts committed while in office, to overturn a guilty verdict for a crime that occurred before he actually took office. That seems like complete nonsense, you might say. Luckily for Trump, though, his friends on the Supreme Court seem to have considered that.

Each New York Times:

The ruling is unlikely to have much direct impact on the Manhattan case, which concerns Mr. Trump’s personal activities during the 2016 campaign, not his presidency or official actions. But Mr. Trump’s lawyers argued on Monday that prosecutors built their case partly on evidence from his time in the White House. And under the new Supreme Court ruling, prosecutors not only cannot charge the president with any official actions, but also cannot cite evidence related to official actions to support other charges.

Good times. In the meantime, perhaps the Court should give Trump a literal get-out-of-jail-free card, since that’s what Monday’s ruling clearly allows him to do.