Trump legal team calls for immediate dismissal of Bragg case, stating that election results supersede political motivations.

The lawyers for President-elect Donald Trump demanded an "immediate dismissal" of New York v. Trump, stating that the American people's decision to re-elect the former president "overrides" Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's "political agenda."

On Wednesday, Todd Blanche, Trump's defense attorney and nominee for Deputy Attorney General, requested that the case against the president-elect be dismissed in a letter to Judge Juan Merchan.

""The mandate issued by the Nation's People on November 5, 2024, supersedes the political motivations of DANY's 'People,' and this case must be immediately dismissed," Blanche wrote."

Blanche stated that the immediate dismissal of this case is required by the federal Constitution, the Presidential Transition Act of 1963, and the interests of justice to facilitate the smooth transition of executive power after President Trump's victory in the 2024 presidential election.

On Wednesday, Blanche sent a pre-motion letter requesting permission to file a motion to dismiss by Dec. 20, 2024 and a stay on all deadlines, which Bragg and New York prosecutors have agreed to.

Blanche argued that Bragg seems to be unwilling to dismiss the politically-motivated and flawed case, which is required by law and will occur as justice is served. Blanche highlighted Bragg's campaign for another term as Manhattan district attorney.

Blanche contended that proceeding with this case would be "uniquely destabilizing" and pose a "threat to the operation of the whole governmental apparatus, both in foreign and domestic affairs."

"Blanche stated that the Court must address new issues and dismiss the case before deciding on the Presidential immunity motion, as any other action would violate the presidential immunity doctrine and the Supremacy Clause."

Blanche stated that even if the Court mistakenly rejects the new interests-of-justice motion, which it should not do, the proper forum for any further proceedings must first be determined in President Trump's removal appeal.

If the court denies any aspect of relief, including by moving forward with any proceedings, Trump would request that the court stay the implementation of the ruling so that President Trump has "adequate time to pursue appellate review."

On Tuesday, Bragg sent a letter to Merchan requesting a stay on the case until 2029. Bragg stated that he would oppose Trump's motion to dismiss but would be open to hearing the defense argument.

Trump was charged with 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree, which stemmed from an investigation led by former Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance and was later prosecuted by Manhattan District Attorney Bragg.

In a historic six-week trial in New York City, the president was found guilty on all charges.

The conviction proceedings against Trump in the final weeks before he is sworn in as the 47th president of the United States were put on hold last week by Judge Merchan, including the Nov. 26 sentencing date.

On Tuesday, Trump officials contended that Bragg's request was a manifestation of "a complete failure of the prosecution" and viewed the case as effectively concluded.

Trump lawyers have requested that Merchan overturn the guilty verdict, arguing that former presidents have substantial immunity from prosecution for official acts in office, as per the U.S. Supreme Court's decision.

The defense has not yet received a ruling from Merchan on the immunity argument, which prosecutors expect to be included in their upcoming dismissal motion.

Trump's legal team contended that certain evidence presented by Bragg and New York prosecutors during the trial should not have been admitted because it constituted "official acts."

During the argument, Blanche contended that the testimony from former White House communications director Hope Hicks, former special assistant to the president Madeleine Westerhout, and other related testimony was inadmissible in the trial.

Trump's lawyers emphasized his disclosures to the Office of Government Ethics while serving as president.

The motion stated that Blanche argued that the evidence presented by Bragg to the grand jury "contravened the holding in Trump that Presidents cannot be indicted based on conduct for which they are immune from prosecution." The motion also noted that the Presidential immunity doctrine recognized in Trump applies to all "criminal proceedings," including grand jury proceedings when a prosecutor seeks to charge a former President using evidence of official acts.

Blanche maintained that Bragg breached the Presidential immunity doctrine by employing official-acts evidence in the grand jury proceedings that led to politically motivated charges in this case.

"The charges must be dismissed because the Indictment is tainted," Blanche argued.

The Supreme Court's ruling on presidential immunity was prompted by a question arising from allegations against Trump in a federal case brought by special counsel Jack Smith, which concerned the events of Jan. 6, 2021 and any attempts to undermine the results of the 2020 election.

Trump pleaded not guilty to all charges in that case.

Smith is ending his legal battles against Trump after his election as the 47th president.

Earlier this year, a federal judge in Florida dismissed Smith’s classified records case against Trump, ruling that the special counsel was unlawfully appointed.