Talk:Juan Merchan

His full name?

He was referred to as Juan M. Merchan in the original lead sentence, but I can't find a reliable source for that middle initial. And Trump referred to him as Juan Miguel Merchan in a tweet was quoted in numerous publications,[1] but that appears to be someone else [2]. Reliable sources are just calling him Judge Juan Merchan and I think we should do the same. MelanieN (talk) 23:34, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Update: someone found a reliable source for Juan Manuel Merchan so that is now in the article. -- MelanieN (talk) 13:59, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

This sentence doesn't make sense and can't be true:

"...sentenced her to six months in jail, which amounted to time already served due to the four months Gristina had spent at Rikers before being bailed."

He either sentenced her to time served at four months, or gave her six months with four months credit, and the two remaining months suspended for a probationary period (more likely scenario). 2601:182:CD00:1640:F890:E7C5:1235:A77E (talk) 19:42, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

In New York, you generally can get away with serving 2/3 of a local jail sentence. So while, yes, the phrase needs to be clarified, someone sentenced to 90 days, for example, who has been in jail for 60 days, will just get released, having served the full sentence. Source: I was a prosecutor for 7 years in Upstate NY. Bjengles3 (talk) 13:33, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Is it really necessary to specify or to delete his daughter’s occupation?

It seems to me it has no relevance in the scope of this article. Koubiak (talk) 05:42, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Of course, it does. 32.209.69.24 (talk) 01:53, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

We say: “Merchan officiated at the wedding of his daughter, Loren, in 2022.[23] She heads a digital marketing agency which works with Democratic Party candidates and non-profits.[23][24]” This is quite brief and reflects the sources. Anythingyouwant (talk) 16:49, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

I removed this as it is not that relevant and also it's clearly trying to slyly imply that he is biased politically, which is a major Trump talking point [3] Steven Walling • talk 16:12, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

I disagree with this edit. I don't think USA Today, Associated Press, ABC News, and a zillion other reliable sources were "trying to slyly imply" anything. Anythingyouwant (talk) 17:52, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

There is no other judge's bio that extensively covers the profession of each of their children. Why would we do so here? It's WP:UNDUE.

There are also numerous reliable sources including Newsweek, BBC, and the Associated Press which point out that it's a rightwing talking point that "the former president suggested without evidence that Judge Juan M. Merchan was kowtowing to his daughter’s interests as a Democratic political consultant". Including her background without mentioning this is not NPOV. Steven Walling • talk 18:06, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

This is standard information in a judicial BLP. For example, see the BLP of Ruth Bader Ginsburg both now and before she died: “Their daughter, Jane C. Ginsburg (b. 1955), is a professor at Columbia Law School. Their son, James Steven Ginsburg (b. 1965), is the founder and president of Cedille Records, a classical music recording company based in Chicago, Illinois.” Anythingyouwant (talk) 03:20, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

A Supreme Court Justice is an order of magnitude more prominent in terms of coverage in reliable source material and level of biographical detail and is not very comparable to lower court justices. A better example would be picking from Category:New York Supreme Court Justices, where living person biographies such as Arthur Engoron and Sheila Abdus-Salaam do not typically go into extended detail about the biography of their children. Notability is not inherited, which is why we don't even have standalone articles for the children of all former Presidents, much less state court justices.

With this context in mind, plus the fact that we have sources that explicitly say the justice is being harassed based on the profession of their children, noting his daughter's work without contextually mentioning what the reliable sources say about Trump's lies and innuendos is not NPOV. Steven Walling • talk 16:40, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia policy says: “Rather than remove imperfect content outright, fix problems if you can, tag or excise them if you can't.” If you think some further context should be provided explaining that the daughter’s profession has led to calls for recusal, then you should add it instead of deleting everything. Moreover, no one is suggesting to give the daughter her own BLP so that’s a red herring. Merchan is a very high profile judge, which is why coverage has been more expansive than usual in reliable sources, and we’re not obliged to pretend otherwise. If you want examples beyond Justice Ginsburg, consider Richard Johnson (judge) and Daniel Sherman (judge), and there are doubtless many more, although it’s a hard thing to search for. Anythingyouwant (talk) 19:20, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Seems like a better solution would be fold this information into the "Notable Cases" section. There is some degree of relevance to his daughter's occupation, but only so far as it attracted Trump's attention in a very specific (and notable) case. It does not seem relevant in terms of Merchan's "personal life."GiantInsects (talk) 18:45, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

This edit is justified because the content is not about Juan Merchan. His daughter is sufficiently mentioned under 'Personal life' in the previous two sentences. Zefr (talk) 20:46, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

We can't leave out that Merchan's family was attacked by the former President of the United States and that he demanded recusal. Those are critical facts about the most prominent case of the judge's entire career, and was covered extensively by reliable sources.

I merged this with the case section as suggested by GiantInsects because it focuses on what matters and is covered by the most sources. Steven Walling • talk 20:56, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Reference problems with New York Law Journal

Much of his judicial time references the New York Law Journal, where the link goes to a page that currently provides no information. Better sourcing needed. Pigdog234 (talk) 19:55, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

I came here to state the same. The link to this information is bad. I could not find any source to support the statement being referenced. Maybe someone can find another source to support the statement. 47.145.15.245 (talk) 02:41, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 May 2024

Judge Merchan's daughter Loren's political activities in NO way impeach him as a Jurist, and do not belong in a Wiki Bio of his life and career. 108.34.161.204 (talk) 20:22, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Agreed and  Done. Zefr (talk) 20:47, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

I disagree. How's that? Query if some editors are trying to white-wash this article? And even the Talk Page? LOL. 32.209.69.24 (talk) 02:09, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

The current treatment of this seems neutral and proper. This BLP does not take any position about the daughter’s activities. Anythingyouwant (talk) 02:45, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

How is it that millions of reliable sources mention his daughter's position as an impeachment of his role as a jurist and for the need for his recusal? Hmmmmm. That's quite odd. Guess that those millions of sources are all in error. And the powers that be at Wikipedia know better. It's confusing. Well, I say "confusing" ... you say "neutral and proper". Tomato / tomato. LOL. 32.209.69.24 (talk) 03:09, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

This article mentions all that. Anythingyouwant (talk) 03:29, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Above ... in this very thread ... the first and second posts state: Judge Merchan's daughter Loren's political activities in NO way impeach him as a Jurist, and do not belong in a Wiki Bio of his life and career. ... and ... Agreed and done. 32.209.69.24 (talk) 03:33, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles change a lot, and not all the changes are always detailed at the talk page. Please go look at what this article says now. You can also look at the article’s edit history for explanations. Thanks. Anythingyouwant (talk) 05:04, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. 32.209.69.24 (talk) 00:41, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Appointment in the two Trump and Trump Organisation cases

I am unable to find out how the judge was appointed to the trump cases. I gather from MSM that it wasn't a random selection. The BBC have a section "Who appointed Judge Juan Merchan? which just unhelpfully concludes that he was "appointed a family court judge [in] 2006". I think it is important to know who appointed the judge if only to reduce conspiracy theories. 2.99.207.204 (talk) 00:23, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

The box at top right says he was appointed by Ann Pfau. But it would be good to know how long the appointment as an “acting” judge lasts, I have no idea. Anythingyouwant (talk) 21:16, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Trump Convicted or Not convicted

I heard several lawyers say conviction happens during sentencing, which has not happened. One of the reasons Trump's legal team wants to delay the sentencing is to avoid the conviction. In other words, Trump was not convicted. If this is true then the statement must be corrected. Walterquez (talk) 03:47, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

In United States practice, conviction means a finding of guilt (i.e., a jury verdict or finding of fact by the judge) and imposition of sentence. If the defendant fled after the verdict but before sentencing, he or she has not been convicted

[4]https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual-609-evidence-conviction#:~:text=In%20United%20States%20practice%2C%20conviction,judge)%20and%20imposition%20of%20sentence. Cathammer (talk) 06:22, 17 November 2024 (UTC)