The ongoing "hush money" trial involving former President Donald Trump in Manhattan has been a spectacle of judicial bias, according to critics.
Justice Juan Merchan, who presides over the case, has been accused of favoring the prosecution, dismissing objections from the defense, and infringing on Trump's constitutional rights.
In a recent development, New York Congresswoman Elise Stefanik (R) has lodged a misconduct complaint against Merchan, questioning the legitimacy of his appointment to the case.
Stefanik's complaint, submitted to the inspector general of the New York State Unified Court System, calls for an investigation into Merchan's repeated assignment to cases involving Trump and his allies. The congresswoman alleges that the selection process, which should be random according to law, appears to be manipulated in favor of Merchan, a known Democrat Party donor.
Stefanik's concerns echo those of legal analysts who have been questioning the impartiality of the trial for months. Merchan's involvement in multiple cases related to Trump, including the former president's financial holdings in New York City and the upcoming trial of Steve Bannon, a prominent Trump adviser, has raised eyebrows.
The odds of one judge being selected for multiple high-profile cases from a pool of over two dozen justices are statistically improbable. According to calculations by ChatGPT, a mathematical model, the chances of such an occurrence are 1 in 15,625. Stefanik echoed this sentiment in her complaint, describing the odds of the same judge being assigned to consecutive cases as "quite low" and three times as "infinitesimally small."
The process of assigning judges to cases in New York involves categorizing cases into 13 "principle parts," ranging from Tax Certiorari to medical malpractice. Judges are assigned to handle specific types of cases based on their expertise, and when a case arises, it is categorized and assigned to a judge from the relevant pool using random number generation. However, the process differs for "City cases," where a judge is assigned based on the calendar number order of the case. Even under this procedure, the chances of all three Trump-related cases being assigned to the same judge seem incredibly low.
The responsibility of investigating Stefanik's allegations now rests with the inspector general of the New York State Unified Court System, Kay-Ann Porter Campbell. A veteran of the Democrat-controlled system, Campbell's investigation will be closely watched, with many approaching the matter with cautious skepticism.
The question of Justice Merchan's future hangs in the balance. Critics argue that his conduct during the trial has been questionable, and he should have recused himself even if his selection was genuinely random. If the case results in an acquittal or a hung jury, Merchan may escape scrutiny. However, a guilty verdict could lead to an appeal and a review of Merchan's conduct during the trial. Regardless of the outcome, the repercussions of this case will likely be felt long after Trump has either returned to the White House or retired to Florida.
Login