During the 2024 election, President-elect Donald Trump faced four criminal cases, but his risk of imprisonment has effectively disappeared after winning the presidency, affirming predictions from several legal experts.
Special counsel Jack Smith’s two federal cases against Trump have been halted, and his two state cases are also likely to be dismissed. Analysts on CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News correctly highlighted key aspects of the cases that ultimately worked in Trump’s favor.
In May, a Manhattan jury convicted Trump on 34 counts of falsifying business records, but he has not yet been sentenced. Sentencing, initially set for July 11, was delayed following a July 1 Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity.
Judge Juan Merchan, overseeing the case, postponed sentencing to Sept. 18, though CNN legal analyst Elie Honig questioned whether that date would hold. In August, Trump requested a further delay until after the election. Merchan rescheduled it for Nov. 26 but noted the date could be adjusted if necessary.
After Trump’s election victory, sentencing was indefinitely postponed. The judge set a Dec. 2 deadline for the defense to file a motion to dismiss the case, with prosecutors required to respond by Dec. 9.
Trump also faced four felony counts from Smith related to alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election. However, Honig noted that, following the Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity, there was no realistic chance of a trial taking place before the 2024 election.
“This case will not go before the election. It will not be tried before the election, and here’s why. Supreme Court has just said there is such thing as criminal immunity,” Honig said. “The test, as we anticipated, essentially, official acts versus unofficial acts. We’re sending it back to the district court. And this is an important detail. The court says several times, whatever the district court finds can be appealed before trial.”
“Jack Smith had made an argument of well, maybe the district judge, the trial judge can work it out and send it to the jury. And then the jury can separate official from unofficial acts,” he continued. “Several times in this opinion, the Supreme Court, the majority, says explicitly: whatever the judge decides about what’s official or unofficial, what’s immune or not immune, that can be appealed back up. 0% chance that happens before November.”
Judge Tanya Chutkan, overseeing the case, denied Trump’s motion to dismiss it in December and initially scheduled the trial for March. However, the trial never took place. On Monday, Chutkan granted special counsel Jack Smith’s request to dismiss the case, citing Department of Justice (DOJ) guidelines requiring its closure before Trump’s inauguration.
Meanwhile, Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’ election interference case against Trump is expected to falter as she faces potential disqualification. A state appeals court is currently reviewing arguments from defendants. Allegations that Willis improperly benefited financially by appointing special prosecutor Nathan Wade to the case have undermined its progress, with their relationship reportedly derailing the case in January.
In February, MSNBC legal analyst Danny Cevallos criticized Willis’ performance during her testimony at a disqualification hearing. While her statements were consistent with Wade’s, Cevallos argued this consistency alone did not make her “credible.”
“Do I think that Fani Willis was a good witness? No, not by any metric by which you measure witnesses who testify in court,” Cevallos asserted.
“I’m not saying there’s any evidence of criminality here, obviously, but is it credible just because Fani Willis and Nathan Wade have their stories straight? Is it credible that after these two in a romantic relationship went on trips to Aruba, that the district attorney pulled out an envelope of sweaty cash and peeled off thousands of dollars and handed it to him?” he asked. “Is that credible? Well, I ask you, any of you have been on trips with your romantic paramours, did you do that after you got back from the trip? Peel off a wad of cash and repay them for it? I have yet to find someone who has done that.”
Judge Scott McAfee declined to outright disqualify Willis in March, instead offering prosecutors the choice to have Wade withdraw or have the district attorney and her entire office step aside. Wade subsequently resigned from the case.
Judge Aileen Cannon in July dismissed Smith’s classified documents case against Trump in Florida after finding the special counsel had been unconstitutionally appointed. Smith on Monday moved to dismiss his appeal of the ruling as it pertains to Trump following his election victory.
George Washington University law professor and Fox News Media contributor Jonathan Turley accurately predicted that Smith would appeal the case and that the process would not be resolved by the November election.
“People are attacking Judge Cannon viciously, often citing the fact that she was a Trump appointee, ignoring the fact that Trump appointees have regularly ruled against the former president,” Turley said. “Those attacks are probably going to increase. But for now, this is a great day … This is the one they were most worried about.”
