In a legal twist that adds complexity to Donald Trump’s ongoing legal battles, his attorney, Steven Sadow, asserted on Friday that if the former U.S. president secures victory in the 2024 election, he should be exempt from facing trial in Georgia. The charges in question relate to allegations of Trump attempting to overturn the 2020 election results in the state.
Sadow presented his argument as the presiding judge, Scott McAfee, grappled with the challenge of determining a trial date amid Trump’s numerous legal entanglements and the imminent 2024 campaign. As the leading contender for the Republican nomination, Trump is poised to challenge Democratic President Joe Biden in the upcoming election.
The lawyer contended that, should Trump emerge victorious, the trial should be postponed until after his term, asserting that it would impede his presidential responsibilities. Trump, currently confronting four concurrent state and federal criminal prosecutions, has consistently sought delays until after the November 5, 2024, election. Sadow’s statements highlight Trump’s potential use of his campaign and a potential second term to defer legal proceedings, even in state courts where self-pardoning authority is absent.
Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis proposed an August 2024 start for the Georgia trial, a timeline that could extend proceedings into early 2025, encompassing Election Day. During the hearing, Judge McAfee questioned the potential interference with the election, to which prosecutor Nathan Wade emphasized the district attorney’s commitment to case progression, not election influence.
Trump expressed objection to the proposed August trial, with Sadow posing the scenario of a Republican nominee unable to campaign due to courtroom defense.
The legal landscape remains uncertain, with McAfee refraining from setting a trial date on Friday, expressing skepticism about trying all 15 remaining defendants simultaneously. As the legal drama unfolds, the timing of Trump’s potential triumph in the 2024 election adds a layer of complexity to an already intricate legal narrative.
