In a significant development, Judge Juan Merchan denied former President Donald Trump’s third attempt to have him removed from the ongoing criminal case concerning alleged hush money payments.

Merchan’s ruling ensures he will remain in charge of the case as it proceeds, with sentencing scheduled for Sept. 18, as ABC News reports.

The latest motion for recusal centered around claims of a conflict of interest, which Trump’s defense linked to the political ties of Judge Merchan and his family.

Specifically, they argued that Vice President Kamala Harris' role as the Democratic nominee for president, combined with the judge’s daughter's work as a political consultant for liberal candidates and causes, created an undue bias against Trump. However, these arguments had been presented twice before and were previously denied by the court.

Merchan Describes Claims as Unsubstantiated

In his three-page order, Judge Merchan made it clear that in his opinion, Trump’s legal team had offered nothing new to support their recusal request. "Defendant has provided nothing new for this Court to consider," Merchan wrote, highlighting that the arguments were "nothing more than a repetition of stale and unsubstantiated claims."

This third attempt was described by the judge as merely an effort to air grievances over previous court rulings. Merchan also criticized the defense attorneys for continuing to rely on claims that had already been rejected, labeling them as "inaccurate and unsubstantiated."

Merchan further pointed out that Trump’s legal counsel appeared to be referencing their prior affirmation, which had already been dismissed by both his court and higher courts. He asserted that their repeated reliance on these claims was “unavailing,” offering no valid grounds for recusal.

Background on the Hush Money Case

The case at hand dates back to 2016, when Trump was accused of making a hush money payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels to silence her about an alleged affair. In May, Trump was found guilty on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records related to these payments. The convictions have been a point of significant legal and political contention.

Trump's legal team has also expressed concerns about the limited gag order imposed in this case, which was affirmed by a mid-level appeals court earlier this month. This gag order restricts public comments by involved parties that could influence the proceedings or jury.

Upcoming Sentencing and Potential Motion to Dismiss

As the case progresses, sentencing is set for Sept. 18, and it is expected to be a critical moment in the legal battles surrounding Trump. However, before sentencing, another key decision is anticipated. Judge Merchan is slated to issue a ruling next month on a motion filed by Trump’s team to dismiss the case altogether, based on a recent Supreme Court ruling regarding presidential immunity.

This motion is likely to be another significant point of contention as it could potentially impact the final outcome of the case. The ruling will examine whether the Supreme Court's decision has any bearing on Trump's criminal liability in this matter.

Merchan Reaffirms Commitment to Impartiality

Throughout his order, Judge Merchan reiterated his commitment to impartiality, asserting that his rulings would continue to be based on evidence and the law.

"As has been the standard throughout the pendency of this case, this court will continue to base its rulings on the evidence and the law, without fear or favor, casting aside undue influence," Merchan wrote.

Merchan’s ruling has significant implications, not only for the immediate proceedings but also for the broader context of Trump's ongoing legal challenges. As the case heads toward sentencing, all eyes will be on the court to see how these legal maneuvers play out.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Judge Juan Merchan’s refusal to recuse himself from the hush money case marks another legal setback for former President Donald Trump.

With sentencing scheduled for Sept. 18, and a key decision on the motion to dismiss expected next month, the case remains a focal point of legal and public interest.

As Judge Merchan reaffirmed what he said was his commitment to impartiality, the proceedings will continue under his oversight, setting the stage for potentially significant legal developments in the coming weeks.