In a recent motion filed on March 7 and made public on Monday, former President Donald Trump's legal team has asked Manhattan Judge Juan Merchan to postpone his upcoming criminal trial scheduled for March 25. The request comes as Trump seeks to await the Supreme Court's ruling on whether he is shielded from criminal prosecution by "presidential immunity" in another ongoing criminal case.

Lower federal courts have already ruled that presidential immunity does not exist, prompting Trump to appeal to the Supreme Court for a review of these decisions. The justices have agreed to hear the case and arguments are scheduled for April 25. Trump's attorneys argue that delaying the trial until the Supreme Court's ruling is necessary to ensure a fair adjudication of the presidential immunity defense.

Trump's legal team raises concerns over the potential use of evidence from his time in office, specifically mentioning filings by the state which indicate that prosecutors intend to present evidence from 2018, when Trump was serving as the President. They contend that allowing evidence of official acts in an unprecedented manner would be improper and warrant delaying the trial.

The criminal case in question is centered around a "hush money" payment made by Trump's attorney, Michael Cohen, to adult film star Stormy Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, just days before the 2016 election. Trump is facing 34 felony counts of falsifying business records related to reimbursement payments made to Cohen in 2017. The former President has pleaded not guilty to the charges and vehemently denies any wrongdoing.

This is not the first instance of Trump attempting to alter the course of the case. He previously sought to have the state trial moved to federal court in 2023, but a federal judge rejected the request, asserting that the reimbursements were not linked to Trump's presidential duties. U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein explicitly stated that Trump had waived any argument based on absolute presidential immunity.

Trump's legal argument persists in claiming that the payments were "official acts" and, as such, should be shielded by presidential immunity. His attorneys outline the necessity to preclude various forms of evidence that implicate the concept of official acts in order to safeguard the defense.

The trial delay request intensifies the uncertainty surrounding the legal proceedings against Trump, as the former President continues to contest the charges against him. The outcome of the Supreme Court's ruling on the question of presidential immunity could have significant implications not only for this particular case but for the broader understanding of the powers and limitations of a sitting president.

While Trump's motion for a trial delay will be decided by Judge Merchan, all eyes now turn to the Supreme Court as they prepare to address this crucial constitutional issue next month.