Criminal con to Teflon Don: How Trump will dodge storm of charges and lawsuits

Donald Trump's election campaign was also a legal strategy in which gaining the Oval Office again would see him in a position to overrule prosecutors and pressure the Justice Department

Just a day ago, Donald Trump faced a daunting future with four looming criminal trials, 91 charges, and the possibility of decades behind bars. His legal strategy was clear: reclaim the presidency to effectively halt his prosecutions.

Now, after his electoral victory over Kamala Harris, Trump’s gamble has paid off, setting up a new phase of legal and political manoeuvring as he prepares to enter the White House for a second term.

The former president, now president-elect, is positioned to wield new influence over his federal cases. Even before his win, Trump spoke of dismantling special counsel Jack Smith’s office, which had brought two of the federal cases against him.

The government lawyer appointed to oversee cases against Trump has accused him of attempting to subvert the 2020 election and mishandling classified documents after his first term. Trump has made his intentions clear, famously declaring, “I would fire him within two seconds.” If he follows through, the Justice Department would undoubtedly move to drop such charges entirely.

However, even with Smith out of the picture, the Justice Department would still have to appeal to the judge to dismiss the case — a request judges don’t always necessarily grant.

For now, Trump’s legal team is expected to press federal judges to suspend or delay state-level cases, particularly those involving high-profile prosecutors like Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg and Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis.

Bragg’s case stems from accusations of falsifying business records to cover up a porn star hush-money payment, while Willis is pursuing racketeering charges related to alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election results in Georgia.

Although Trump cannot directly dismiss the state prosecutors, his lawyers argue that his presidential duties would make it challenging to move forward with these trials. Their argument emerged last year when Georgia Judge Scott McAfee asked Trump’s attorney, Steve Sadow, whether a Trump victory would prevent a trial next year.

Sadow responded, “Under the Supremacy Clause and his duties as president, this trial would not take place until after his term.” With Trump’s return to the White House now imminent, the possibility of delaying his state cases until 2029 looms large.

These cases would have accelerated swiftly had Trump lost. In New York, Judge Juan Merchan had scheduled Trump’s sentencing over his falsifying business conviction for November 26 - a date that had already been pushed back to avoid interfering with the election and emphasising the court’s impartiality.

With Trump now president-elect, it remains uncertain whether this sentencing will proceed as scheduled. In Georgia, meanwhile, Willis successfully won re-election, allowing her to continue overseeing Trump’s racketeering case.

However, a state appeals court is currently considering a petition to remove her due to a potential conflict of interest involving her relationship with a former special prosecutor. This case might now stall indefinitely with Trump’s imminent return to power. His re-election victory also changes the course for his federal cases.

If he had lost, Smith would likely have pursued his charges with increased urgency. The Justice Department was already working to revive the Florida documents case, which had previously been dismissed by a pro-Trump judge who ruled the special counsel’s appointment unconstitutional.

Federal prosecutors were poised to continue the battle in the US Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, where both sides had filed briefs and awaited a court date. With Trump’s impending control of the Justice Department, however, the future of this appeal - and indeed the case itself - will be all but dead.

In Washington, Smith’s other high-profile case alleging election interference could face similar headwinds. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, overseeing the case, previously remarked that Trump’s campaign would not influence her decisions.

“I am definitely not getting drawn into an election,” she said at a September hearing. Yet now that Trump has won, his legal team may push for a dismissal based on presidential immunity, with any ruling likely to end up before the Supreme Court.

The coming months promise a high-stakes legal showdown as Trump and his team seek to dismantle or indefinitely postpone the cases against him. With control over the Justice Department, he will undoubtedly halt federal cases, while state-level prosecutions could stall due to his presidential obligations.

Cases that likely won’t be affected by Trump’s win is his pending appeals of civil judgments against him totalling more than £388 million. The president-elect is appealing the largest award — more than £370 million and growing by more than £82,000 a day — in a civil fraud case in New York state court. During arguments before the state Appellate Division, three members of the five-judge panel indicated they thought the award was too large.

A lawyer for the state attorney general’s office argued that the award is appropriate because the amount of fraud Trump and his company were found responsible for was sizable and went on for an extended period of time. It’s unclear when the panel will rule.

Trump is also appealing a pair of jury awards totaling about £68 million that he has to pay writer E. Jean Carroll. Carroll filed two suits against Trump, one for allegedly sexually assaulting her in the 1990s and defamation and another for defaming her while he was president. The appeals court is expected to rule in the sexual assault case first, and that ruling could come at any time.

Trump’s strategy to win back the White House as a means of fighting his legal battles has, so far, worked. However, the unprecedented nature of these proceedings raises complex questions about executive power, accountability, and the impact of presidential immunity.

As Trump prepares to take office, the future of his legal battles remains uncertain. His opponents warn that a return to the White House could compromise the integrity of the justice system, while his supporters argue that the cases against him have always been politically motivated.

For now, Trump stands poised to become the first president-elect to carry the weight of criminal convictions and active cases.