In an unprecedented move, former President Donald Trump has called upon the Supreme Court to intervene in the wake of his conviction on 34 counts of falsifying business records by a New York jury.
The trial, which has been met with widespread criticism and accusations of political bias, concluded on Thursday with a guilty verdict that many, including Trump himself, view as a miscarriage of justice.
Conservative commentator and author Mark Levin was among the first to suggest appealing the case directly to the nation’s highest court.
“The issue is how to get out of the New York system and bring the case to the Supreme Court, which may or may not take it up,” Levin wrote on the social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter.
He drew parallels to the landmark Bush v. Gore case, in which the Supreme Court intervened due to the case’s implications for the presidential election.
Thinking further out loud
The issue is how to get out of the New York system and bring the case to the Supreme Court, which may or may not take it up. That is why I look to Bush v Gore, where the S Ct decided to step in BECAUSE it was a presidential election. There was another…
— Mark R. Levin (@marklevinshow) May 31, 2024
Trump, in a post on his Truth Social platform Sunday night, expressed his outrage at the timing of his sentencing, which is set to take place just four days before the Republican National Convention on July 15.
“The ‘Sentencing’ for not having done anything wrong will be, conveniently for the Fascists, 4 days before the Republican National Convention,” he wrote. The former president went on to question the impartiality of the presiding judge, Juan Merchan, whom he described as “HIGHLY CONFLICTED” and “appointed by the Democrats.”
The case against Trump, prosecuted by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, has been mired in controversy from the start.
Bragg, a Democrat who ran on a platform of “I will get Trump,” has faced accusations of political motivation in his pursuit of the former president.
The trial itself has been characterized by many as a “legal travesty,” with concerns raised about due process violations and the criminalization of activities that are not typically considered illegal.
Levin, in his X posts, outlined a potential strategy for appealing the case to the Supreme Court, suggesting that the harm caused by the trial extends beyond Trump himself to the federal electoral system and the precedent it could set for future cases.
READ NEXT: Key Parts of the US Economy Are Slowing All at The Same Time: Report
“The denial of due process infected every aspect of the case,” he wrote, arguing that the Supreme Court has the authority to intervene in extraordinary circumstances.
