It's deemed to be murky -- leally speaking
=====
The indictment, however, raises thorny issues about state and federal law that could provide openings for the defense to try to get the charges tossed before the case even gets to trial.
“The bottom line is that it’s murky,” said Richard Hasen, an expert in election law and professor at the University of California, Los Angeles law school. “And the district attorney did not offer a detailed legal analysis as to how they can do this, how they can get around these potential hurdles. And it could potentially tie up the case for a long time.”
=============
Legal analysis
The indictment raises novel and complex legal issues.[146][147] Legal experts contacted by the New York Times said that the indictment combines business records charges with state election law in a way that had never previously been done in a case involving a federal campaign.[146] According to the Associated Press, the indictment involves difficult legal issues which the defense might be able to use to get it dismissed.[147]
While the indictment has been published, it does not reveal the District Attorney's "specific legal theory" behind the case; for example, it is not specific about "how each of the charges was elevated to a felony", nor does it "specify the potential underlying crimes". While the law does not require such specificity, attorney Ken White and law professor Richard Klein have commented that this makes it difficult to assess the legal merits of the case.[148][149]
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
