Former Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz slammed Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s case against Trump for “depriving” voters of a “fair election” Tuesday on Fox, adding that the presiding judge should “absolutely” recuse himself.
Dershowitz appeared on “Hannity” to discuss former President Donald Trump’s trial, which began Monday, where Bragg has accused the former president of falsifying business records to allegedly pay porn star Stormy Daniels in hush money. Fox host Sean Hannity questioned the former law professor on Bragg’s heightened charges against Trump, along with allegations that presiding Judge Juan Merchan’s daughter could be a conflict of interest. (RELATED: Dismissed Juror Tells MSNBC Of ‘Jarring’ Experience With Trump In Court: ‘This Is Just Another Guy’)
“Well, look I’m looking for a fair election. I’m an American voter who hasn’t decided at this point who to vote for and who to vote against. I just want a fair election. This case is depriving the American public – I’m speaking for the American public not for either candidate – of the right to have a fair election,” Dershowitz stated.
“President Trump should be in Pennsylvania today. There is a statute that gives him the right to leave the court any day, but the statute says, ‘in the absence of an objection by the people.’ In other words, the prosecution has a veto over the judge’s decision whether to allow him to leave the courtroom on any given day. That is unconstitutional and this case ought to be challenged.”
Dershowitz continued to state that Trump’s lawyers should make a motion against the judge’s power that allows Trump to only leave the courtroom conditionally and emphasized that the case overall is “election interference.” Hannity then questioned the former law professor on Merchan’s decision to stay on the case, to which Dershowitz called out the judge’s daughter.
“There ought to be a motion made by his lawyers immediately under section 340.50, in which the judge has the power to allow him to leave the courtroom and campaign, but only if the prosecution agrees to it – which is clearly unconstitutional. The gag order is unconstitutional. You cannot prevent a defendant from attacking the witnesses, from attacking the judge’s daughter – if the judge’s daughter could be a basis for disqualification,” Dershowitz stated.
“Look, I agree with Greg – the American public is sick and tired of seeing the legal system weaponized. Whether you’re a Democrat or Republican, whether you’re a Trump supporter or a Biden supporter, you should be equally appalled. We have the right to decide who to vote for without the thumb, or in this case, the elbow of the criminal justice system led by Democrats – in this case the district attorney who campaigned on a promise to get Trump essentially. We have a right to not have that election interference. This case is paradigmatic election interference.”
“Do you believe should’ve recused himself?” Hannity asked.
“Absolutely, it’s not even a close question,” Dershowitz responded. “[His daughter] can make money, she’s probably making money merely from the fact that he is sitting on the case. And if Trump loses, as a result of the judge’s ruling, she puts money in the bank. That’s a conflict of interest,” Dershowitz responded.
At the beginning of April, Merchan expanded a gag order on Trump after he called out the judge’s daughter for allegedly making comments she made about the former president online. Trump criticized Merchan for sitting on his case as he had an allegedly conflict of interest with his daughter’s political stance, however, the New York State Unified Courts system stated that the account was misattributed to her.