The judge overseeing Donald J. Trump’s criminal case in Manhattan postponed his sentencing until after Election Day a significant victory for the former president as he seeks to overturn his conviction and win back the White House.
In a ruling on Friday the judge Juan M. Merchan rescheduled the sentencing for Nov. 26 citing the unique time frame this matter currently finds itself in.
He had previously planned to hand down Mr. Trump’s punishment on Sept. 18 just seven weeks before Election Day when Mr.Trump will face off against Vice President Kamala Harris for the presidency. This is not a decision this court makes lightly but it is the decision which in this court’s view best advances the interests of justice Justice Merchan wrote in the four page ruling which noted that this matter is one that stands alone in a unique place in this nation’s history.
The judge appeared eager to skirt a swirl of partisan second guessing in the campaign’s final stretch.
Asserting that the court is a fair impartial and apolitical institution he said that the integrity of our judicial system demands that the sentencing be free from distraction or distortion.
But while his decision will avert a courtroom spectacle before the election the delay itself could still affect its results keeping voters in the dark about whether the Republican presidential nominee will eventually spend time behind bars.
It is unclear whether sentencing Mr. Trump in September would have helped or harmed him politically his punishment could have been an embarrassing reminder of his criminal record but could have also propelled his claims of political martyrdom.
Justice Merchan’s decision came at the request of Mr. Trump who had asked to delay the sentencing partly to win more time to challenge his conviction on charges that he falsified records to cover up a sex scandal.
Prosecutors working for the Manhattan district attorney Alvin L. Bragg who brought the case had deferred to the judge paving the way for at least a brief postponement.
The judge’s ruling Friday took a defensive tone refusing to address some of Mr. Trump’s supporting arguments for a delay which he described as a litany of perceived and unsubstantiated grievances.
He also vented frustration at Mr. Bragg’s pursuit of a middle ground noting that despite the district attorney’s stated neutrality his prosecutors’ filing had highlighted logistical challenges to a September sentencing and seemingly supports Mr.Trump’s bid to delay.
