Donald Trump’s ‘hush money’ case sentencing postponed until after US election

Unlock the US Election Countdown newsletter for free

The stories that matter on money and politics in the race for the White House

Donald Trump will not face sentencing over his “hush money” conviction before the US presidential election on November 5, after a Manhattan judge granted his request to delay the proceeding scheduled for later this month.

Justice Juan Merchan on Friday said maintaining the September 18 sentencing date was “fraught with complexities”, and that he was treating Trump — the former US president and current Republican presidential candidate — similarly to other criminal defendants whose sentencing hearings are repeatedly postponed.

He set a new sentencing date for November 26.

Lawyers for Trump had argued that it would be “personally and politically prejudicial to President Trump and his family, and harmful to the institution of the presidency” for the proceedings to take place before November, even if any punishment imposed was subsequently reversed.

The office of the Manhattan district attorney, who brought the case, did not oppose the request to delay sentencing, saying it would defer to the court.

Trump was found guilty on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in May. He was originally set to be sentenced on July 11. But one day after the US Supreme Court ruled in a separate Trump case that US presidents were entitled to sweeping immunity for their official acts, Merchan agreed to delay the sentencing until September.

He said he needed more time to weigh whether evidence in the hush money trial, including social media posts and public statements, was inadmissible in light of the high court’s decision.

In a letter to the court last month, Trump’s lawyers argued the former president should be given more time to challenge any ruling on the effects of the immunity decision by Merchan, and there was “no basis for continuing to rush” the sentencing.

Merchan said he had further adjourned the sentencing “to avoid any appearance — however unwarranted — that the proceeding has been affected by or seeks to affect the approaching presidential election in which the defendant is a candidate”.

He conceded that the case had a “unique place in this nation’s history”, but reiterated that the court was a “fair, impartial, and apolitical institution” and that the decision “best advances the interests of justice”.

The decision is the latest in a number of victories for Trump’s legal team, who have successfully ensured that none of his remaining criminal indictments will proceed to trial before the election.