Yes—It’s Still Important That Our Felon President Face a Sentence

It is easier because Trump only has to get a higher court to think there’s enough to his legal claims that such a court would want to have a chance to give those claims a full analysis, and therefore need to keep the sentencing from going forward. As so often in recent years, in which he has been much more lucky than good, Trump’s legal arguments are weak, novel, or both. But he doesn’t need to win his case; he just needs to persuade a court to stay—i.e., halt—the sentencing while it considers his legal claims. And he has three courts to try—New York’s intermediate court, New York’s highest court, and the ultimate resort of the U.S. Supreme Court, which of course has saved his skin before.

It is harder, however, because of the legal requirements to secure a stay. Trump has to establish that (1) he is likely to prevail on the merits, (2) the balance of equities favors him, and (3) if the court doesn’t take the case, he will suffer irreparable injury. Otherwise, the standard response of the legal system would be that he can bring any challenge to his conviction he wants to—but after sentencing.

Trump offers two arguments that he deserves special treatment.