Did melania waive spousal privelidges?
Executive summary
There is no reporting in the provided sources that Melania Trump has waived any spousal privilege in the New York hush‑money case; legal commentators in the cited coverage treat spousal privilege as a likely barrier to her being compelled to testify and report that it is unlikely she will be called as a prosecution witness [1] [2]. Neither article says she has voluntarily waived privilege or agreed to testify, and neither provides evidence of a waiver [1] [2].
1. The question behind the headlines: what “waiver” would mean here
Waiver would require an affirmative act — such as Melania agreeing to testify or explicitly releasing communications from protection — that removes the legal bar to compelled testimony, and the coverage notes that spousal privilege is the most relevant protection the defense could invoke if she were subpoenaed [1] [2]. The cited pieces treat the privilege as a practical obstacle to the prosecution calling a current or former spouse as a witness, rather than as a technicality already undone by any known conduct from Melania [1] [2].
2. What the reporting actually says about Melania’s status
Both Times of India and Newsweek recount that Judge Juan Merchan read lists of potential witnesses that included Melania but that legal experts cited in the stories think she is unlikely to be called and unlikely to be forced to testify because of spousal privilege and her tangential connection to the underlying allegations [1] [2]. Those experts emphasize that she is not alleged to be involved in the conduct at issue and describe the privilege as a meaningful barrier to compelled testimony [1] [2].
3. How commentators frame the privilege in this case
Legal commentators quoted in the reporting say the most applicable protection is the spousal privilege covering confidential marital communications, and they note the prosecution could subpoena her but that she could assert privilege if called [1] [2]. Sources quoted also suggest political and narrative costs for the prosecution in forcing a former first lady to testify, which factors into assessments of whether prosecutors would pursue that route [1].
4. What is not in the reporting — no evidence of a waiver
The two provided articles do not report any statement, court filing, or other concrete action by Melania Trump or her counsel that would amount to a waiver of spousal privilege; therefore, there is no documented basis in these sources to assert she has waived it [1] [2]. If a reader needs confirmation beyond these articles — for example a filing or on‑record testimony indicating waiver — that material is not present in the provided reporting and cannot be inferred from it [1] [2].
5. Competing considerations prosecutors weigh before seeking her testimony
Sources indicate prosecutors face both legal hurdles (privilege claims) and strategic considerations — experts note her lack of direct involvement in the alleged misconduct and warn that calling her might feed a narrative of sensationalism rather than proving a crime — factors that make compelling her testimony unlikely, according to the coverage [1] [2]. That is an assessment reported by commentators in the articles, not a court ruling, and it explains why neither outlet treats a waiver as a live fact [1] [2].
6. Bottom line stated plainly
Based on the supplied reporting, Melania Trump has not been reported to have waived spousal privilege; legal experts quoted in both pieces expect the privilege to make her testimony unlikely and the articles contain no evidence of any waiver or release of privilege by her [1] [2]. Any definitive determination about waiver would require a contemporaneous filing, public statement, or courtroom development not included in these sources, and that absence is material to the conclusion [1] [2].