Written By 
Reviewed By Omar Stanton
Introduction
Donald Trump’s Manhattan hush-money trial has captured headlines for months. After his May 2024 conviction on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records, Judge Juan Merchan set a sentencing date—only to postpone it repeatedly. With each delay, New Yorkers and the nation watch closely: when will Trump face justice, and how will this pause shape both legal precedent and political debates? In this article, we unpack the reasons behind the postponement, outline the sequence of delays, and explore what lies ahead for Trump’s Manhattan case.
Background: The Hush-Money Conviction
In May 2024, a Manhattan jury found Trump guilty on 34 counts of falsifying business records tied to hush-money payments to adult film actress Stormy Daniels during the 2016 presidential campaign. The charges stemmed from his lawyer’s payment of $130,000 to silence Daniels, with Trump’s business records later altered to conceal the transaction. This historic conviction marked the first time a former U.S. president was found guilty of a crime.
After conviction, Judge Merchan scheduled Trump’s sentencing for November 26, 2024, igniting intense debate over timing and legal procedure.
First Delay: Presidential Immunity Ruling
Soon after his conviction, Trump’s legal team argued that the U.S. Supreme Court’s July 2024 ruling on presidential immunity could apply. They contended that evidence gathered against Trump violated new immunity standards. In response:
- On July 1, 2024, the Supreme Court held that former presidents enjoy broad immunity for official acts.
- On September 2024, Judge Merchan granted Trump’s request to delay sentencing, pending clarity on immunity’s scope.
This initial postponement reflected the court’s caution in light of high-level constitutional questions.
Second Delay: Presidential Election Aftermath
As the 2024 presidential election approached, Trump—then front-runner—sought further delay, arguing that sentencing during a heated campaign would violate due process and distract from election duties. Prosecutors did not oppose this bid to pause proceedings. In November 2024, Merchan agreed to hold off sentencing until after the election.
This second delay underscored concerns about political timing and the potential impact on voters’ perceptions.
Third Delay: Post-Election Pause
After Trump won the 2024 election, now President-elect, his team renewed calls to postpone sentencing until after his inauguration. Prosecutors—while maintaining that election status did not confer immunity—acknowledged the logistical and legal complications of trying a sitting president. In January 2025:
- The Manhattan District Attorney’s office suggested deferring all remaining proceedings until the end of Trump’s term in 2029, or at least until after January 20, 2025 wsj.com.
- Judge Merchan again paused the case, stating he would decide on the scope and length of the delay.
This third postponement made it clear that the hush-money saga would remain in limbo throughout Trump’s term.
Legal Options on the Table
With sentencing delayed, several paths lie open:
- Conditional Discharge: Merchan could issue an “unconditional discharge” that leaves Trump with a criminal record but avoids jail time—for instance, probation only westvirginiawatch.com.
- Deferred Sentencing: Proceed with sentencing after Trump’s presidency, in 2029, as prosecutors propose.
- Case Suspension: Suspend all court deadlines—effectively freezing the case pending further legal developments around immunity apnews.com.
- Dismissal: Although unlikely without new evidence or legal shifts, Merchan could consider dismissing the case if prosecutorial evidence is deemed invalid under immunity principles.
Each option carries weighty implications for legal precedent and checks on executive power.
Political and Public Reactions
The trial’s delays have drawn mixed reactions:
- Trump Supporters argue the postponements respect presidential dignity and avoid unfair distractions during governance.
- Critics contend that no one is above the law and that delays undermine accountability.
- Legal Experts warn that extended pauses could erode public trust in the judiciary and invite future presidents to exploit immunity rulings.
New York City residents, eager for closure, watch the court docket anxiously—wondering when the trial will finally conclude.
Implications for Future Cases
Trump’s Manhattan case sets several precedents:
- Presidential Immunity Scope: How far does immunity extend post-presidency?
- Timing of Sentencing: Under what circumstances can courts delay sentencing for high-profile defendants?
- Executive vs. Judicial Branch: Balancing the need for timely justice with respect for elected leaders’ duties.
Courts across the country are likely to cite Merchan’s handling as guidance if future presidents face criminal charges.
What’s Next on the Docket?
As of June 2025, no new sentencing date has been announced. Key next steps include:
- Judge Merchan’s Ruling: He must decide whether to formally stay the case until 2029 or set an interim date.
- Potential Appeals: Trump may appeal the conviction or delay decisions to higher courts, prolonging the process.
- Political Developments: Changes in White House legal policy or DOJ leadership could influence the case’s pace.
Observers expect clarity by late 2025, but the possibility of further motion practice makes the timeline uncertain.
Conclusion
Donald Trump’s postponed trial in Manhattan reflects a clash between legal procedure and political reality. From immunity challenges to election timing, Judge Merchan’s repeated delays highlight the unique complexities of prosecuting a former—and now sitting—president. As New Yorkers await a final ruling, the case continues to shape the boundaries of presidential immunity, judicial independence, and accountability. Whether the trial resumes post-2029 or merges into broader immunity jurisprudence, Trump’s Manhattan hush-money saga will remain a landmark for years to come. Stay tuned as this unprecedented legal drama unfolds—Manhattan awaits its date with history.
