Special Poll
The New York judge overseeing former President Trump’s hush money case has postponed the trial to mid-April, aligning with Trump’s interest in delaying his legal confrontations. Originally set to commence with jury selection on March 25, Judge Juan Merchan has agreed to a one-month deferment following the prosecutor’s agreement, prompted by the recent turnover of over 70,000 pages of new evidence by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York, some of which bear relevance to the trial.
Judge Merchan has decided to use March 25 to conduct a hearing focusing on the new evidence and scheduling, postponing the trial’s start by 30 days from that date. He emphasized the ongoing directive against any party commitments until the trial concludes.
While the Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office was prepared for the original trial date, it did not contest the 30-day postponement, citing caution. Trump’s attorneys, however, argue that the volume and significance of the new evidence necessitate a longer delay than proposed.
Disputes have arisen between Trump’s legal team and Bragg’s office over the handling and origin of the new documents, with Trump’s attorneys challenging the District Attorney’s narrative and Bragg’s office attributing the delay to the federal prosecutors.
As the final batch of documents from federal prosecutors is expected, Judge Merchan plans to delve into the delay’s circumstances during the upcoming hearing, requesting detailed timelines and communication records from both sides to determine responsibility and potential prejudice or sanctions.
This trial delay is part of a broader pattern of Trump seeking to postpone his various criminal trials. With the Supreme Court set to consider Trump’s immunity claims in his election interference case on April 25, related legal actions, including the hush money trial, are being influenced, with Trump advocating for a pause in proceedings.
Amid these legal maneuvers, Trump’s team continues to argue for the case’s dismissal, citing alleged prosecutorial misconduct, while Bragg’s office refutes these claims. Judge Merchan has stated that the forthcoming hearing will specifically address the alleged discovery violations by the District Attorney’s office in relation to the new document turnover.
Trump’s campaign asserts that the case lacks legal and factual foundation and should be dismissed, pointing to the judge’s decision to adjourn the trial as a step towards addressing alleged misconduct by DA Bragg.