CNN’s Elie Honig Says Suggestion Of Pushing Trump’s Sentence To After He’s President Is ‘Preposterous’

CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig said Tuesday that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s suggestion to postpone President-elect Donald Trump’s sentencing until after his presidential term is “preposterous.”

Bragg wrote to Judge Juan Merchan, who is overseeing the New York hush money case, that he opposes dismissing the case and suggested deferring the remaining criminal proceedings until after Trump leaves office in January 2029. Honig said this possibility is out of the ordinary and impractical, arguing that Trump would have a strong case against the district attorney’s suggestion.

“The second thing that really jumps out at me is the DA in this letter said what you said Boris about immunity, that it doesn’t necessarily cover post-trial proceedings so the DA floats the possibility in their letter, they say ‘we want to look into various options,’ including possibly having his sentencing happen in 2029 when he’s done his second term as president. To me, that is a preposterous suggestion just as a practical matter. You can’t just put off a sentence for 4-plus years. I think Donald Trump would have a very strong argument when this day comes, when he’s 82 years old finishing up his second term, that that’s just too long to wait.”

📺 Embedded media — coming soon

Bragg argued that Trump’s temporary immunity while he serves as president does not require the court to dismiss a post-trial case and that “non-dismissal” options need to be considered, which includes a possible sentencing postponement until after Trump leaves office.

“Given the need to balance competing constitutional interests, consideration must be given to various non-dismissal options that may address any concerns raised by the pendency of a post-trial criminal proceeding during the presidency, such as deferral of all remaining criminal proceedings until after the end of Defendant’s upcoming presidential term,” Bragg wrote. “Indeed, one corollary of the temporary nature of presidential immunity is that immunity should not lead to consequences that ‘forever thwart the public’s interest in enforcing its criminal laws.’”