Former President Donald Trump made headlines earlier this year when he was convicted in New York on 34 counts of falsifying business records.

However, House Republicans are calling for that conviction to be overturned on the grounds that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg violated Trump's constitutional rights. 

House report details instances of "lawfare"

According to Fox News, that claim is made in an interim staff report from the House Judiciary Committee and its Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government.

Titled "Lawfare: How the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office and a New York State Judge Violated the Constitutional and Legal Rights of President Donald J. Trump," the document is thirty five pages long.

"A fundamental principle of the American system of justice is that no individual is above the law. But just as important is the precept that prosecutors prosecute conduct, not individuals," the report states.

"Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, however, ran for office on a platform of investigating and prosecuting President Trump, bragging about his extensive experience suing President Trump," it continues.

Report lays out Bragg's political considerations

"Although Bragg was initially hesitant to bring charges once he became district attorney, he faced intense political pressure to do so, including a leaked resignation letter from a special assistant district attorney who attacked Bragg for being too timid," the report asserts.

"That same prosecutor, Mark Pomerantz, later authored a tell-all book in which he took Bragg to task for failing to prosecute President Trump," it explains.

"Unsurprisingly, just months after Pomerantz’s book premiered — and after President Trump declared his candidacy for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination — Bragg succumbed to this political pressure and filed charges relying on Pomerantz’s theory of the case," the report goes on to recall.

In addition to criticizing Bragg, the report also accused Judge Juan Merchan of making  "egregious legal rulings before and during the trial that all cut against President Trump’s rights."

Trump's sentencing date pushed back

As The Hill pointed out, the move came following a Supreme Court which found that former presidents enjoy a presumption of immunity from prosecution for official actions they take while in office.

Supreme Court immunity decision collides with Trump’s NY conviction https://t.co/RxPDFJPFPm

— The Hill (@thehill) July 7, 2024

The ruling has prompted Trump's lawyers to argue that some of the evidence used by Bragg during his prosecution of Trump was inadmissible.