NEW YORK, NY – As former President Donald Trump faces a hush money criminal case, the judge has denied his request to delay the trial due to extensive pre-trial publicity. This decision follows a series of similar denials from courts this week as Trump fights to delay the start of the trial with jury selection scheduled to begin on Monday.
Trump’s lawyers argued that the jury pool had been inundated with what they deemed as highly prejudicial news coverage of the case, leading them to request an indefinite postponement. However, Judge Juan M. Merchan dismissed this argument, stating that Trump himself had played a significant role in generating publicity surrounding the case through his public statements and social media presence.
Merchan highlighted Trump’s involvement in two federal defamation trials and a state civil fraud trial in Manhattan over the past year, noting that the former president was responsible for much of the surrounding publicity. He emphasized that questioning prospective jurors would address any concerns about their ability to remain fair and impartial during the trial.
In response to the judge’s decision, Trump expressed his intention to testify at the trial, referring to the case as a “scam” and emphasizing his commitment to telling the truth. Despite his assertions, Trump raised concerns about jury selection, citing the process as largely dependent on luck and expressing dissatisfaction with the judge assigned to the case.
Trump’s legal team had previously argued that potential jurors in Manhattan had been exposed to biased and unfair media coverage related to the case, leading many to already believe the former president was guilty. They pointed to the negative portrayal of Trump in the media and the influence of key witnesses like Michael Cohen and Stormy Daniels in shaping public opinion.
Prosecutors countered the defense’s claims, asserting that publicity surrounding the case was unlikely to diminish and highlighting the role of Trump’s own statements in fueling media coverage. They emphasized the impartiality of the potential jury pool in Manhattan, citing the city’s diverse population as evidence that fair and unbiased jurors could be found.
The hush money case against Trump represents the first of four criminal indictments set to go to trial, marking a historic moment as the former president faces allegations of falsifying business records to conceal payments to Cohen. Trump has pleaded not guilty to 34 felony counts and maintains that the payments were legitimate legal expenses.
Despite ongoing efforts by Trump’s legal team to delay the trial through appeals, individual appellate judges have rejected their appeals thus far. The case is now set to be considered by a panel of appeals judges, who will determine the next steps in the legal proceedings.
Amidst the legal battle, tensions have escalated between Trump’s lawyers and the Manhattan district attorney’s office. The prosecution’s recent actions against Allen Weisselberg, the former Trump Organization finance chief, have drawn criticism from Trump’s legal team, who accuse the DA’s office of unethical tactics while ignoring alleged perjury by Cohen.
As the trial date approaches, the clash between Trump and the legal system underscores the high stakes and complex dynamics at play in one of the most significant legal challenges the former president has faced to date.