Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has requested that Judge Juan Merchan deny former President Donald Trump’s motion for recusal from his ongoing hush money case.

Bragg contends that Trump’s claims of bias due to Merchan’s daughter's political affiliations -- including links to Kamala Harris -- are irrelevant and have been previously addressed, as the Washington Examiner reports.

The D.A.'s request, made public on Friday, follows Trump’s renewed effort to have Merchan recuse himself, arguing that the judge’s impartiality is compromised because his daughter, Loren Merchan, works for Authentic Campaigns, a marketing firm that has provided services for Harris and other prominent Democrats.

DA Argues Against Recusal Motion

Prosecutors dismissed Trump’s concerns as speculative, describing them as “vexatious and frivolous” attempts to relitigate issues already resolved. They emphasized their belief that Harris's new status as the main opponent in Trump’s 2024 presidential bid does not create a conflict of interest warranting recusal.

Judge Merchan has previously denied similar motions from Trump, with an independent panel concluding that there was no conflict of interest. Trump’s latest motion reiterates previous arguments, claiming Harris’s increased prominence necessitates Merchan’s recusal.

Ties to Kamala Harris Highlighted

Loren Merchan’s professional relationship with Harris, stemming from her work at Authentic Campaigns, has been a focal point of Trump’s recusal request. Authentic Campaigns, a firm known for its work with Democratic politicians, received substantial payments from Harris’s 2020 presidential campaign and other Democratic entities.

Trump’s legal team highlighted that Authentic Campaigns was a top vendor for Harris, receiving over $5 million, and has amassed over $12 million from various Democratic politicians and groups in 2024. They argued that this relationship provided significant financial and professional benefits to Loren Merchan.

Prosecutors Dismiss Claims as Speculative

Prosecutors countered these assertions by labeling them speculative and lacking concrete evidence that Loren Merchan or her firm would directly profit from Trump’s conviction. They emphasized that Trump’s motion did not present new information and was based on the same arguments previously rejected.

“Indeed, defendant rests his latest motion on the same affirmation he presented in support of his April 3 motion. This regurgitated showing does not come close to meeting the standard to renew,” the prosecutors stated.

Past Requests Denied

This is the third time Trump has requested Merchan’s recusal, with previous attempts dismissed for not demonstrating a valid conflict of interest. The independent panel reviewing the initial motions concluded that there was no basis for recusal, a decision upheld by the court.

Trump’s attorneys argue that the evolving political landscape, particularly Harris’s potential candidacy in the 2024 presidential election, intensifies the need for Merchan’s recusal. They contend that Merchan’s decisions in Trump’s case could potentially benefit Harris and Authentic Campaigns.

Financial Links to Harris’s Campaign

Trump’s legal team pointed out that Authentic Campaigns' founder led a group known as “White Dudes for Harris,” which raised significant funds for her campaign. They suggested that this financial and professional connection between Merchan’s daughter and Harris posed a conflict.

The prosecution, however, maintained that these claims were unfounded and speculative, lacking any substantive evidence to suggest that Loren Merchan’s work would influence Judge Merchan’s impartiality in Trump’s case.

Arguments of the Defense

“Your Honor’s daughter has a long-standing relationship with Harris, including work for political campaigns," Trump's lawyers wrote.

They went on, "She has obtained -- and stands to obtain in the future -- extensive financial, professional, and personal benefits from her relationship with Harris."

Conclusion

In conclusion, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has urged Judge Juan Merchan to deny Donald Trump’s request for recusal from the hush money case, asserting that the reasons presented are irrelevant and previously addressed.

The prosecutors argue that the claims made by Trump are speculative and do not demonstrate a valid conflict of interest.

As the case progresses, the court's decision on the recusal request will play a significant role in the ongoing legal proceedings involving the former president.