Bragg’s case in short

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg laid out his 34-count indictment of President Trump with links to underlying documents in this press release dated April 4, 2023. The indictment relies on section 175.10 of New York’s criminal law (“Falsifying business records in the first degree”): “A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the first degree when he commits the crime of falsifying business records in the second degree, and when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.”

In his most recent update on the trial, Andrew McCarthy concisely explicates the absurdity of the prosecution with links to previous columns that support each point. Under New York’s state constitution, the felony statute invoked gives insufficient notice of what it is criminalizing. The indictment fails to explain what laws Trump is alleged to have broken. Bragg purports to enforce federal law over which he has no enforcement jurisdiction. To top it off, Bragg’s version of federal campaign-finance law — over which he has no authority — diverges from the interpretations followed by the two federal agencies with exclusive jurisdiction over that law (the Justice Department and the FEC). Other than that, gangbusters.

Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.

Responses