New York
CNN
—
The slow-burning corruption trial of New Jersey Sen. Bob Menendez is poised to achieve a flamable new section this week as prosecutors and protection attorneys take a look at the boundaries of the court docket, the legislation and the federal decide operating the present.
US District Court docket Choose Sidney Stein, whose mild talking model belies his agency grip on the proceedings, has more and more been confronted with selections about what proof can and can’t be launched – and even mentioned – by the prosecution. The protection, too, has at instances examined his endurance with its questioning of witnesses and tactical objections.
Almost two weeks after a jury was selected and seated in Manhattan federal court docket, the query of Menendez’s guilt or innocence, and that of his two co-defendants, seems to hinge on how Stein interprets the protections Menendez enjoys as a sitting US senator. Prosecutors have promised clear proof that the New Jersey Democrat accepted bribes and acted, as stated in the indictment, as an agent for the Egyptian authorities. Menendez and his co-defendants have pleaded not responsible.
However even because the prosecution continues to put the groundwork on this advanced, sprawling case, protection attorneys – significantly these representing Menendez – are rigorously searching for to zero out anecdotes, paperwork and different particulars that they are saying are impermissible in circumstances of alleged corruption by public officers.
Listed below are 4 questions anticipated to dominate the courtroom – and a congressional race on the opposite facet of the Hudson River – over the approaching week.
Prosecutors from the Southern District of New York are combating a authorized battle on two fronts.
On one facet, the federal government is being hit by the US Structure’s “speech or debate” clause, a provision designed to defend lawmakers from having their congressional work used in opposition to them in a courtroom.
On the opposite, prosecutors are additionally contending with a more moderen precedent, from 2016, when the Supreme Court docket’s determination in McDonnell v. United States raised the bar for prosecutors attempting to show corruption expenses in opposition to elected political leaders.
This successfully signifies that among the most doubtlessly incriminating proof in opposition to Menendez can’t be displayed or spoken of, at the least indirectly, in entrance of a jury.
Neither facet within the case was taken abruptly right here. Menendez’s protection is making clear use of each, whereas prosecutors have argued, broadly and within the back-and-forth over proof, that their case is so robust as to be invulnerable to those challenges.
Menendez is especially well-drilled in a few of these dynamics, having argued in 2017 that his previous corruption trial needs to be thrown out owing to protections he derived by the speech or debate clause. The Supreme Court docket rejected that bid, however his attorneys on this case (the earlier one led to a mistrial) are aggressively invoking the precedent to stifle prosecutors.
The federal government’s skill to sketch a transparent and convincing image for the jury regardless of these rising constraints will doubtless decide Menendez’s authorized destiny.
Will Menendez take the stand?
The chances are lengthy, sure, however it’s not implausible.
There may be nothing but to counsel that Menendez or his protection crew is planning to make the high-risk, high-reward transfer – one which former President Donald Trump, on trial up the street in Manhattan Legal Court docket, rejected earlier than transferring on to closing arguments.
However the risk just isn’t as distant as many observers would possibly anticipate – leaving the potential for an additional twist on this already sensational case.
That potential has extra to do with the make-up of the jury than how the case is unfolding within the courtroom. Particularly, it’s the truth that many of the jurors are college-educated, with greater than half holding graduate or postgraduate levels. Their professions replicate as a lot – a banker, therapist and artist-turned-business proprietor amongst them.
Many prosecutors consider – as a rule of thumb – that the extra formally educated and professionally completed the jury, the extra inclined will probably be to listen to immediately from a defendant, particularly if that particular person involves court docket with a excessive profile or political energy.
It’s unclear if this group of prosecutors takes that view – or, in fact, whether or not the jury would give Menendez credit score for taking the oath.
The protection kicked off its case by pointing the finger at Nadine Menendez, the senator’s spouse, who’s going through a separate however associated trial this summer season. She has additionally pleaded not responsible.
Because the senator’s lawyer informed it, Nadine Menendez was protecting secrets and techniques – often within the type of gold bars saved her bed room closet – from her husband, whereas usually making the most of his energy and cache to counterpoint the pair.
“She stored issues from him,” lawyer Avi Weitzman informed the jury. “She stored him at midnight.”
The prosecution, in its opening assertion, informed a unique story. Assistant US Legal professional Lara Pomerantz mentioned that the senator used “his spouse as a go-between” together with his co-defendants and international brokers.
“(She) communicated with the bribe payers, she handed messages to Menendez, and she or he collected among the bribes,” Pomerantz mentioned. “All in change for Menendez’s guarantees to make use of his energy as a senator.”
Was Nadine Menendez a bit participant who aided her husband in crimes that benefitted them each, because the prosecution insists – or was she, because the protection argues, one thing extra like a mastermind? The jury’s reply to that query may determine the case.
Weeks earlier than the jury in Decrease Manhattan renders their verdict on Menendez, voters in North Jersey’s eighth Congressional District could have a say on his household’s political standing.
Menendez himself is not running for reelection within the Democratic main on June 4, however his son, freshman Rep. Rob Menendez Jr., is on the poll and going through a critical problem from Hoboken Mayor Ravi Bhalla.
Menendez Jr. was first elected to the seat in 2022 following the retirement of Democrat Albio Sires, who succeeded Bob Menendez in an earlier model of the seat in 2006 when the latter was appointed to the Senate.
Although Bhalla has not argued outright that his opponent is corrupt or needs to be held accountable for his father’s alleged crimes, among the exterior teams supporting him actually are.
“They are saying the apple doesn’t fall removed from the tree, so it’s no surprise that Rob Menendez is defending his father’s corruption,” mentioned one TV advert from America’s Promise, a brilliant PAC backing Bhalla. “Jersey has sufficient dangerous apples. Rob Menendez – rotten to the core.”
Menendez Jr. immediately addressed that line of assault in a latest spot of his personal.
“My opponent needs to run in opposition to my father as a result of he’s scared to run in opposition to me. That’s on him,” Menendez Jr. says, talking straight to digital camera. “I’m targeted on combating for you.”
The recent backlash in opposition to Backyard State Democrats’ uniquely highly effective political machine has additionally performed a major function within the marketing campaign, maybe much more than the comings and goings of the trial. However for Menendez, the senator and father, the need of the eighth District’s main voters may weigh closely on his political future – and legacy.