According to reports, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg opposed an effort by former President Donald Trump’s attorneys to transfer his hush-money case to federal court on Tuesday.

The Hill reported that earlier this month, Trump’s attorneys argued that the case cannot be tried in a state court because the alleged violations occurred while he was president and are therefore a federal matter.

“Such a move would increase the potential jury pool, which is currently limited to the heavily Democratic population of Manhattan,” The Hill noted.

In court documents filed Tuesday, prosecutors in Manhattan argued that the case should remain with the state court because the former president’s “alleged criminal conduct had no connection to his official duties and responsibilities as President, but instead arose from his unofficial actions relating to his private businesses and pre-election conduct.”

The Hill further states:

Trump faces 34 felony counts of falsifying business documents in relation to his reimbursement of Michael Cohen, his former fixer, for a $130,000 hush money payment made just prior to the 2016 presidential election.

Cohen made the payment to pornographic film actress Stormy Daniels in exchange for her silence regarding her alleged affair with President Trump. Trump has denied the affair and entered a not-guilty plea.

According to federal statutes, charges against federal officers can be transferred to federal courts if their alleged actions relate to an official act and constitute a “colorable federal defense.”

“Defendant’s alleged criminal conduct here is similarly divorced from any official duty or responsibility: the pre-election scheme and $130,000 payment to an adult film actress predated defendant’s inauguration, and his post-inauguration actions all derived from this pre-inauguration conduct, rather than any presidential duty, because defendant sought to conceal facts and to reimburse payments that preceded his time in office,” Manhattan prosecutors wrote.

“Under these circumstances, the defendant has failed to establish that the criminal conduct alleged here related to any acts performed under color of the Office of the President,” prosecutors added.

Trump’s attorneys have asserted that Bragg’s prosecution of their client is politically motivated, noting that federal courts have “protective jurisdiction” to prevent state officials from unjustly targeting federal officers.

“This claim fails because ‘protective jurisdiction’ does not exist as a recognized basis for federal court jurisdiction, and because the defendant could not satisfy the predicates for invoking that theoretical basis for federal court jurisdiction even if it did exist,” Manhattan prosecutors argued, however.

The response from the former president is due by June 15. The Hill reported that “U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein, a Clinton appointee, has scheduled a hearing for June 27 to decide whether the case will proceed in federal court, but the judge could rule beforehand.”

In the interim, the prosecution by the state continues. In the coming days, Bragg’s office is anticipated to provide the case-related evidence it has gathered to Trump’s attorneys.

More on this story via Conservative Brief:

Famed attorney Alan Dershowitz has expressed skepticism of the legal grounds supporting Bragg’s case, saying he is using “made-up laws” to muster what he sees as a politically motivated case. CONTINUE READING…