In a recent court filing made public on Thursday, the Manhattan district attorney's office is pushing for the judge who oversaw former President Donald J. Trump's criminal hush-money trial to uphold his conviction. The prosecutors are seeking to challenge Trump's attempt to overturn the case based on a recent Supreme Court ruling.

The Manhattan prosecutors argue that the Supreme Court's decision granting Trump broad immunity for official actions taken during his presidency has no bearing on this prosecution. They emphasize that the charges against Trump did not hinge on official acts but rather on his involvement in covering up a sex scandal that could have derailed his 2016 campaign. This personal and political crisis did not involve his conduct as president.

Trump's lawyers, on the other hand, have attempted to link the two cases and contend that the Supreme Court's ruling invalidated certain evidence presented in the Manhattan trial. They argue that official acts can be deemed inadmissible as evidence, even in cases involving private misconduct.

The district attorney, Alvin L. Bragg, counters this argument by stating that Trump's lawyers missed their opportunity to raise the immunity defense and have subsequently misinterpreted the Supreme Court's ruling. The prosecutors assert that the ruling does not apply to the type of evidence they presented against Trump, highlighting the personal nature of the testimony that was unrelated to his duties as president.

Furthermore, the prosecutors argue that even if the ruling did apply, they presented substantial additional evidence that renders any potential error "harmless." They stress that the guilty verdict should stand, as the jury considered extensive testimony and documentary proof when finding Trump guilty on all 34 felony charges.

Todd Blanche, a lawyer for Trump, declined to comment on the district attorney's filing. However, he criticized the verdict as "flawed and unjust" in a letter to Justice Merchan, the presiding judge. Blanche also accused the district attorney of attempting to counter Trump's arguments for dismissing what he called a "lawless indictment."

The dispute arises from a controversial Supreme Court ruling on July 1 in Trump's criminal case in Washington, where he is accused of plotting to overturn his 2020 election loss. The ruling, decided 6-3 along partisan lines, established that a former president is entitled to presumptive immunity from prosecution for all official acts.

Following that ruling, Trump's lawyers in the Manhattan case requested a delay in his sentencing to challenge the verdict. The judge, Justice Merchan, agreed to rule on the verdict on September 6 and postponed the sentencing accordingly. The potential sentence for Trump ranges from a few weeks in jail to up to four years, and it will be determined on September 18.

The Manhattan case revolves around Trump's efforts to conceal details about his sex life. After a seven-week trial, a jury convicted Trump on all 34 felony counts of falsifying records to cover up a hush-money payment to Stormy Daniels, a porn star, during the final days of the 2016 campaign. The jury found that Trump's former fixer, Michael D. Cohen, made the payment, and Trump approved plans to disguise the reimbursement on company paperwork.

While Trump faces legal challenges in multiple jurisdictions, the Manhattan case is the only one expected to go to trial before the upcoming presidential election. Despite denying wrongdoing, Trump has criticized both the judge and the district attorney, portraying them as part of a Democratic conspiracy against him.

Now, it is up to Justice Merchan to decide whether to uphold Trump's conviction or consider overturning the verdict based on the recent Supreme Court ruling. The decision will have significant implications for Trump's legal situation and could determine his potential sentence.