A Lawyer Explains the Stormy Daniels Case
The story certainly sounds like it should be a big deal: A porn star is suing the president of the United States of America. But when Stormy Daniels popped back into the news on Tuesday, it was hard to grasp just how big a deal it actually was, considering all the back-and-forth we've seen already. This week her lawyer filed a complaint for declaratory relief, arguing that the hush agreement Daniels signed regarding her alleged affair with Donald Trump was null and void...which, what?
And then the New York Times revealed yesterday that the president's lawyer secretly filed a restraining order in order to silence her. All of which points to the fact that Daniels wants to talk, and whatever she wants to say, the White House really doesn't want us to hear.
To translate the legalese and explain what Daniels and her team are really trying to do - and why - we tapped David S. Cohen, Esq., a professor of law at Drexel University (he's no relation to Trump's lawyer, Michael D. Cohen, btw). Pencils ready?
So exactly what did Stormy Daniels do on Tuesday?
David S. Cohen: She filed a lawsuit asking a court to declare her nondisclosure agreement null and void because she wants to be free to talk about her affair with Donald Trump. Some people claim she’s bound by a non-disclosure agreement [NDA], and she wants to not be bound by it.
What is a declaratory relief?
DC: It’s a request for the court to declare the legal status between two people. If she were to go ahead and talk about the affair, she’s afraid she would be sued by Trump’s people for violating the non-disclosure agreement. It’s preemptively asking the court to say whether she’s allowed to talk or not.
What's a hush agreement? It's not a legal term, is it? Is it just a different term for an NDA?
DC: [laughs] No. It’s a just the colloquial, slightly sinister term to say that they were trying to hush her up during the election.
Are they allowed to do that? Isn’t it a bribe?
DC: You could say it’s a bribe for me to go to the hardware store and buy a nail, like, "Here’s a nail and I’m going to give you five cents for it." It’s just a transaction. You’re purchasing her silence. That’s totally fine, in normal circumstances. It gets tricky if the campaign’s involved.
Did they forget to counter-sign? How do you finalize this kind of contract?
DC: Usually one signs, the other signs, and it’s done. One side would keep it, and the other would have a copy. I don’t think the law cares about that kind of specificity, there just has to be some kind of signature suggesting you intend to be bound by it.
Who on the Trump team messed up here? Or was a mistake even made?
DC: That’s what the court is going to determine, if there is a mistake. She’s alleging he didn’t sign it. I don’t know what he’s going to say, but probably that he signed it, or his lawyer signed it, and that should be good enough.
I’m wondering if this is just an administrative error.
DC: That's the case.
What do you think Daniels is attempting to do here? What are the ramifications if she gets her way?
DC: She wants to talk about it. The whole point of shutting her up is so she wouldn’t go public with her allegations. So if the NDA is null and void, she’s going to talk.
What will Trump do next?
DC: He might try and say, “You can’t sue me while I’m president, let’s wait a while.”
On what grounds can he do that?!
DC: Bill Clinton tried to do this, when he was sued by Paula Jones for sexual harassment when he was president. He claimed that "even though this took place before I was president, it will distract me from my job, which needs singular attention unlike any other job, so hold this off until I’m no longer president." It went to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court said no, the case goes forward. Trump may try to do something similar. He’ll lose, probably, but he might try to get around it that way. Or he might just defend it in court, and say, "I signed it. I did the equivalent of signing it." I’m sure he’ll delay, then defend.
So it’ll be some time before we hear from Stormy.
DC: By all accounts, this [alleged affair] was consensual and between two adults. The worst that happens as a result of this case - unless there’s something with payments coming from the campaign - is details come out that he’s a lying pig. But he was elected on that platform, right?
You Might Also Like