When a verdict comes down in Donald Trump’s criminal hush-money trial, all eyes will be on the Manhattan judge Juan Merchan, who has presided over the historic case.
After all, Trump was the first US president, former or present, to face a criminal trial. And before Trump faced a jury in this case, Merchan oversaw other proceedings directly tied to the presumptive GOP presidential candidate.
Those cases included the tax-fraud trial against the Trump Organization and proceedings against the former company CFO Allen Weisselberg. Merchan also will preside over the case against Steve Bannon over allegations that the far-right Trump strategist cheated thousands who donated to build sections of a US-Mexico border wall, scheduled for trial in September.
Merchan, who was born in Bogotá, Colombia, and immigrated to the US at age six, grew up in the New York City borough of Queens. The first in his family to attend college, he started working at nine and held a variety of jobs, such as hotel night manager, during his studies, according to the New York Times.
Merchan’s past high-profile cases have included proceedings against the “soccer-mom madam” Anna Gristina. He also presides over Manhattan mental health court, where participating defendants agree to undergo closely tracked treatment with the goal of having their cases dismissed, avoiding future encounters with the justice system and finding their footing, the Associated Press said.
While outside observers might think that Merchan is in a no-win position compared with his other cases, legal veterans have praised his handling of the proceedings, noting how he has fostered normality.
“His job is to [oversee] cases, criminal cases, civil cases, whatever cases that come before him, and to treat each one in an impartial manner and I think he’s just trying to do that,” said Shira Scheindlin, a former Manhattan federal court judge who presided over the watershed stop-and-frisk case and is now with the law firm Boies Schiller Flexner.
“It’s high-profile. It’s a little more stressful. I’m sure to have that, to have a former president sitting there in front of you every day, and all the people that former president was bringing with him – he’s been bringing congressmen and senators and governors and whatever, with him,” Scheindlin said.
“So, it’s a little more stressful to see all those people in your courtroom, but it’s not an impossible position. He’s a very experienced judge, and he’s been doing what he knows how to do for 18 years, which is to run a tight ship.”
“Judge Merchan works very hard to not have his courtroom bogged down in distractions and optics and antics … Merchan presided over this trial in the fairest, most efficient and least dramatic way possible,” said Ron Kuby, a veteran defense attorney with a focus on civil rights.
“With his opinions, he has always been a careful and thoughtful jurist, and in the Trump case, every time he had the time to consider a legal issue, he considered it thoroughly and usually wrote an opinion about it, explaining his reasoning and the law supporting the outcome.”
The extraordinary circumstances that Merchan has had to navigate with Trump’s trial have been intensified due to the ex-president’s behavior. Trump repeatedly railed against trial witnesses, prompting Merchan to impose a gag order barring him from doing so.
Merchan expanded the gag order to include court staffers’ families and jurors, as well as prosecutors in the case, after Trump went on the attack against the judge’s daughter. This order did not prohibit Trump from making comments about Merchan, nor the district attorney, Alvin Bragg.
Trump couldn’t help himself, however, and continued to slam trial witnesses and comment on jurors. Merchan held Trump in contempt 10 times, fining him $10,000, and threatened him with jail if he continued to run afoul of his ruling.
Merchan also had to go on the defensive against claims by Trump that had the potential to spur unrest; the candidate’s unsubstantiated allegations about Joe Biden stealing the 2021 election, for example, had prompted the deadly January 6 Capitol attack.
When Trump simply falsely claimed that Merchan had banned him from testifying in his own defense, the judge went on record to clarify this wasn’t the case. “I want to stress, Mr Trump, that you have an absolute right to testify at trial,” Merchan said. “The order prohibiting extrajudicial statements does not prevent you from testifying in any way.”
Neama Rahmani, president of West Coast Trial Lawyers and a former federal prosecutor, noted Merchan’s handling of the gag order in praising the judge.
“I thought he’s done a good job because it’s a very difficult case with a very difficult defendant,” Rahmani said. “I don’t think there was any way he was going to jail Donald Trump for the gag order but he had to try to get him in line – and ultimately, he was able to get him somewhat controlled.”
Trump has repeatedly cast Merchan as biased against him, saying as he left court on 21 May, for example, that “the judge hates Donald Trump. Just take a look. Take a look at him. Take a look at where he comes from. He can’t stand Donald Trump. He’s doing everything in his power.”
Trump also said in an 11-minute courthouse hallway rant: “They’re already cheating on the election with this. And you don’t know what’s happening because the judge is so biased, so corrupt. He’s so corrupt and he’s so conflicted that you never know how these things ... a corrupt judge will far surpass a great case for us.”
Jeffrey Lichtman, a longtime criminal defense attorney whose high-profile clientele has included El Chapo, expressed mixed feelings on Merchan’s handling of the case. He spoke positively of Merchan allowing the defense to extensively question Michael Cohen, Trump’s former fixer-turned-top prosecution witness. But he also saw shortcomings.
“I thought that for the most part he was fair, more fair than I’d expected,” Lichtman said of allowing Cohen’s lengthy cross-examination. “I think that as a defense lawyer, you want to have a judge let you have your way with the main cooperator in the case without being stopped.
“With regard to the entire case, I thought that he’s been thin-skinned,” Lichtman said. He pointed to Merchan’s admonition of Robert Costello, an attorney and defense witness in Trump’s orbit, whose behavior the judge described as “contemptuous” in a closed proceeding: “I thought that his handling of Costello was, frankly, an embarrassment to the court.”
Lichtman did not agree that Trump was getting short shrift because he was Trump.
“What people don’t realize: they think that Donald Trump is being treated unfairly because he’s Donald Trump,” Lichtman said. “Every defendant in criminal cases in most courtrooms in New York, federal and state, get the short end of the stick in terms of fairness, in terms of trial rulings.”
The more high-profile the case, Lichtman said, the more this happens, saying: “We’re in a constant uphill battle to get anything we consider to be a fair break from the judge.”
Merchan’s handling of the media has also prompted criticism among the press, who have cited access issues. For several days, Merchan barred photographers from photographing Trump, with court officials alleging, without evidence, that one had taken a photo outside a designated area.
And, after Merchan started to address Costello’s outbursts, he ordered court officers to “clear the courtroom”, kicking out the press and refusing to give a media attorney an opportunity to address him about the access issue.
The US constitution, as well as New York state and common law, stipulates that there is a presumption of access in court proceedings, meaning they are supposed to be open to the press and public, save for extremely rare circumstances.
Merchan offered circular reasoning for his decision to clear the courtroom: that he had to clear the courtroom knowing that he would have trouble clearing the courtroom.
“The fact that I had to clear the courtroom and that the court officers, including the captain, had great difficulty clearing the courtroom, and that there was argument back and forth between the press and including counsel for the press, goes to why I had to clear the courtroom in the first place,” he said.
