The judge in the hush money case has had enough of this.

Donald Trump was found guilty on 34 counts in the New York hush money trial – but he faces a lengthy appeals process. And what happened to the other three cases against him – Jack Smith's federal election interference and secret documents case and Fani Willis' Georgia election interference case? All three cases have hit various obstacles. To help you better follow Trump's ongoing legal entanglements, we'll keep you updated each week on the latest developments in Keeping up with the Trump trials.

Last week, numerous lawsuits circulated in the former president's New York hush money trial. New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan denied the Trump team's third request that Merchan should recuse himself from the case. At the same time, Donald Trump's lawyers requested that Merchan further delay the former president's conviction.

Trump's third attempt to remove his New York judge fails

Judge Merchan has had enough of Trump's attempts to remove him from the hush money case. In a new motion, he writes that the defendant's “arguments are nothing more than a repetition of stale and unproven claims.”

Trump's lawyers have tried to compel Merchan to disqualify because his daughter was president of a consulting firm that handled Democratic campaigns. But when Trump first raised the issue in a motion to disqualify filed in May 2023, Merchan consulted with the Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics and that panel issued an opinion concluding that “the judge's impartiality cannot reasonably be called into question because of the judge's relative's business and/or political activities.” Merchan said a copy of that opinion was provided to Trump's defense team.

Still, Trump's lawyers continued to try to force Merchan to withdraw from the hush money case, filing a second motion in April that Merchan said contained “no new facts or law.” The judge again denied the motion. Then, on July 31, Trump's lawyers filed another Motion to dismiss, which challenged Merchan's news gag order — which was issued because Trump began attacking Merchan's daughter and others online — and raised allegations that the judge's daughter had a long-term relationship with Vice President Kamala Harris, now the Democratic presidential candidate.

“This Court now reiterates for the third time what should have been clear by now: innuendo and misrepresentation do not create a conflict,” Merchan wrote. “A recusal is therefore not necessary, let alone required.”

And Trump wants to postpone his conviction in the hush money case

The former president’s lawyers Really do not want Trump to be sentenced on September 18. They wrote a letter to Merchan last week making several arguments as to why that date simply isn't an option. Among other things, they believe the jury verdict in the hush money case should be overturned in light of the Supreme Court's ruling on presidential immunity.

In May, a jury found Trump guilty on 34 counts of falsifying business records to pay porn star Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election. Merchan set Trump's sentencing for July 11. But then in early July, the Supreme Court stepped in and announced its high-profile ruling that presidents are immune from prosecution for certain “official” acts. That prompted Merchan to postpone Trump's sentencing until September 18 while he considers the impact of the Supreme Court's decision on the case. Merchan is expected to announce his decision on September 16, two days before the new sentencing date.

Trump's lawyers argue that this is too short a deadline and that Trump needs “sufficient time to consider and pursue state and federal appeal options in response to an adverse ruling.” Additionally, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg is expected to file a motion for judgment with Merchan in the lead-up to September 18 – a document detailing what sentence Bragg believes Trump should receive. In another attempt to paint the standard procedure as a witch hunt against Trump, his lawyers claim it will “personally and politically harm President Trump and his family.”

And on Monday, the Manhattan district attorney indicated he had no objection to delaying Trump's sentencing as the former president's lawyers admitted for the first time that they intend to appeal Merchan's ruling on presidential immunity and that he would look at Merchan's ruling in the Object.