Trump fails to replace judge for third time ahead of hush money sentencing
Trump has lost his most recent attempt to replace the judge involved in his hush money criminal case, ahead of a possible sentencing next month.
It comes after the former US president and Republican presidential nominee was found guilty of 34 counts of falsifying business records in a landmark criminal conviction in May.
He became the first ex-American president in history to be convicted of felony crimes, in a trial which focused on how he allegedly made payments to cover up stories which portrayed him in a bad light leading up to his 2016 White House bid.
Trump's lawyers have asked Judge Juan Merchan, who presided over the case, to step aside numerous times over his daughter's political ties to the Democrats.
On Wednesday, Merchan refused for the third time, and said Trump's demand was “rife with inaccuracies and unsubstantiated claims”.
His lawyers had argued Merchan has a conflict of interest, as his daughter has worked as a political consultant for prominent Democrats and campaigns.
Among them was Vice President Kamala Harris, when she sought the 2020 nomination for president.
A New York state court ethics panel ruled last year that Merchan could continue on the case, as a relative's independent political activities are not “a reasonable basis to question the judge’s impartiality".
Subscribe free to our weekly newsletter for exclusive and original coverage from ITV News. Direct to your inbox every Friday morning.
Trump's trial centred around payments made to adult actress Stormy Daniels to allegedly buy her silence about an affair which took place in 2006.
The former president said the stories were made up and the case was an attempt to smear his 2024 election bid.
He has pledged to appeal the verdict, something which cannot legally happen before a defendant is sentenced.
Meanwhile, Trump's lawyers have also launched a bid to overturn the verdict and dismiss the case altogether because of the US Supreme Court's July ruling on presidential immunity.
It decided former presidents can have partial immunity when being prosecuted for any "official acts" committed in office.
Trump’s lawyers therefore believe jurors in the hush money case should not have heard some of the evidence presented in the case - such as former White House staffers describing how the then-president reacted to news coverage of the Daniels deal.
At the beginning of August, Judge Merchan set a September 16 date to rule on the immunity claim, and September 18 for “the imposition of sentence or other proceedings as appropriate.”
Want a quick and expert briefing on the biggest news stories? Listen to our latest podcasts to find out What You Need To Know…