By indicting a former president of the United States on criminal charges a Manhattan grand jury may have raised the curtain on the third and climactic act of the tumultuous political career of real estate developer, reality television star, and ex-White House occupant Donald John Trump.
The grand jury voted Thursday to indict Mr. Trump on charges related to his role in paying hush money to a porn star prior to the 2016 election. A conviction is far from certain, but the indictment alone is a historic event, marking the first time a former president of the United States has faced serious criminal prosecution.
Why We Wrote This
The oncoming legal drama will resolve key questions about Donald Trump’s – and the nation’s – future. Will voters return him to the Oval Office if he triumphs in court, or even if he does not? Or will he be called to account for past actions?
It opens the next stage in a narrative arc of a president who was particularly focused on the performative and symbolic aspects of the nation’s highest office. He won in 2016 despite the opposition of his party’s establishment and scoffing of legacy media. Then he lost his bid for reelection and railed, falsely, against what he claimed was a fraudulent vote.
Now he is running again for president while facing the likelihood of unprecedented criminal trials and perhaps prison, in multiple jurisdictions. It is new territory for American democracy, and likely a major turning point for the nation’s politics.
By indicting a former president of the United States on criminal charges a Manhattan grand jury may have raised the curtain on the third and climactic act of the tumultuous political career of real estate developer, reality television star, and ex-White House occupant Donald John Trump.
The grand jury voted Thursday to indict Mr. Trump on charges related to his role in paying hush money to a porn star prior to the 2016 election. A conviction in the case is far from certain, but the indictment alone is a historic event, marking the first time a former or current president of the United States has faced serious criminal prosecution.
In a way, the indictment seems to open the next stage in a narrative arc devoted to the rise, fall, and possible redemption of a president who was particularly focused on the performative and symbolic aspects of the nation’s highest office.
Why We Wrote This
The oncoming legal drama will resolve key questions about Donald Trump’s – and the nation’s – future. Will voters return him to the Oval Office if he triumphs in court, or even if he does not? Or will he be called to account for past actions?
He won the office in 2016 against the wishes of his party’s establishment and despite the scoffing of much legacy media. Then he lost his bid for reelection and railed, falsely, against what he claimed was a fraudulent vote.
Now he is running again for president while facing the likelihood of unprecedented criminal trials and perhaps prison, in multiple jurisdictions. Besides the hush money case, he could also be indicted in Fulton County, Georgia, on charges related to his efforts to overturn the 2020 vote in that state. In addition, federal special counsel Jack Smith is investigating Mr. Trump’s alleged role in sparking the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, as well as the possible illegal retention of classified documents and other presidential records following his 2020 loss.
One way or another, the legal drama Mr. Trump is entering will resolve key questions about his and the nation’s future. Will he best his enemies and triumph in court? Will voters return him to the Oval Office despite indictments or even convictions? Or will he be called to account for past actions?
Mr. Trump, at his rally in Waco, Texas, last weekend, said his “enemies are desperate to stop us,” and that “2024 is the final battle – it’s going to be the big one.”
Such apocalyptic language may be overly dramatic, even demagogic. But the former president’s oncoming legal struggle is new territory for American democracy and likely a major turning point for the nation’s politics.
“Historians are trained to avoid the word ‘unprecedented’ like the plague, and yet Donald Trump has forced us, since he started running in 2015, to use what’s basically a bad word in our field,” says Jeffrey A. Engel, director of the Center for Presidential History at Southern Methodist University.
An unusual first case
The specific charges against Mr. Trump aren’t yet known. News reports indicate he faces more than 24 counts related to the payment of hush money to porn star Stormy Daniels on the eve of the 2016 presidential vote.
Ms. Daniels alleges she had a brief affair with Mr. Trump, which he denies. A $130,000 payment, routed through Mr. Trump’s then-lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen, kept Ms. Daniels from going public with her story at a time the GOP presidential candidate had already faced harsh public criticism for the infamous “Access Hollywood” tape, which showed him using demeaning and dismissive language toward women.
Mr. Trump is expected to be arraigned in Manhattan on Tuesday. At that time, the charges against him are likely to be formally revealed.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg and his attorneys have spent months piecing together a case that centers on allegations that Mr. Trump falsified business records connected to the payments to Ms. Daniels. They believe these false records also constituted a campaign finance violation, as they were in essence an illegal contribution to the Trump 2016 campaign intended to bolster his electoral chances.
This two-pronged approach makes Mr. Trump’s alleged actions a felony. The Manhattan DA’s office has used the tactic before. Business-records charges by themselves are common.
But some experts believe it is overall an untried and novel approach, particularly since it represents such a historic legal step.
“You would hope that there is more than what meets the eye,” said David Shapiro, a financial crimes specialist and former FBI agent who teaches at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, in an interview last week.
At the same time, other serious legal cases dealing with Mr. Trump appear to be moving forward. In Georgia, Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis has said charges are “imminent” in her election interference case. A federal judge has ordered former Vice President Mike Pence to comply with a subpoena and testify in front of a grand jury empaneled by Mr. Smith about the Jan. 6 riot.
In that context, the Manhattan case may be just the beginning of a period of increasing legal peril for Mr. Trump.
The hush money case may be the least consequential of Mr. Trump’s legal worries. Potential penalties are relatively minor compared with those in the other investigations proceeding against him.
Innocent until proven guilty
It is important to remember that in America, Mr. Trump is innocent until proven guilty, says Mr. Engel. And the alleged conduct for which he has been indicted in New York happened prior to his 2016 victory.
“It’s notable that we have for the first time in history a former president indicted, but we have yet to have a former president indicted for something they did in office,” Mr. Engel says.
Other experts say the indictment remains a step forward for legal accountability. Presidents may be immune from prosecution while in office, per a ruling of the Department of Justice. But that does not mean that they are immune from prosecution, period.
“It is a good reminder that no one is above the law, even a former president. We always say that, but I guess it’s gratifying to see that it’s true,” says Barbara McQuade, a former U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan who is now a law professor at the University of Michigan.
Yet the first prosecution of a former president also could lead the nation into more troubling territory. It establishes the precedent that presidents are not above the law – and also the precedent that state and local prosecutors can bring charges against them.
There are many such prosecutors across America, many of them elected partisans, and the potential for them to pursue former presidents and other officials for minor offenses could be great, says George Edwards III, distinguished professor emeritus of political science at Texas A&M University.
“I’m very concerned about that, and I’d much rather that the former president [be] facing charges coming from trying to overturn an election, either in the United States in general or in Georgia in particular. That would have been a much more serious matter that people could understand easily,” says Professor Edwards.
Staff writer Story Hinckley contributed to this article.
Editor’s note: This developing story has been expanded.