Insights from the latest developments in Trump's hush money trial

Seven jurors were selected on Tuesday for the panel that will determine whether former President Donald Trump is guilty or innocent in the New York hush money case. This selection process has shown how challenging and sometimes heated it can be to choose a complete jury.

To learn more about Trump's criminal trial, stay informed and up to date.

A timeline of the Donald Trump-Stormy Daniels hush money case

Your questions about Trump’s trial, answered

Fact check: Trump’s false and unsubstantiated claims about his Manhattan criminal case

What questions do you have about Trump’s hush money trial? Ask us here

Trump’s lawyers carefully examined the social media posts of potential jurors to identify any individuals with a bias against Trump. They even went as far as questioning some jurors about their posts in an attempt to have them removed from the jury.

The actions of Trump's legal team led Judge Juan Merchan to deliver a strong warning to Trump regarding his behavior towards the first juror questioned about her social media activity. This warning made it clear that the judge would not tolerate any efforts to intimidate jurors. While this issue did not arise again throughout the day, it is likely to cast a shadow over the criminal trial, which marks the first of a former US president.

The courtroom remains dark as the anticipated six-week trial continues. Jury selection will proceed on Thursday, with a fresh group of 96 potential jurors. These individuals may ultimately serve on the jury panel.

Now, let's go over the key points from the second day of the Trump hush money trial:

We have (more than half) a jury

So far four men and three women have been selected to serve on the jury that will ultimately consider 34 counts of falsifying business records against Trump.

An Irish man working in sales in New York City was chosen as the jury foreperson, who speaks for the group. Out of the seven members, five have a college degree or higher education. Two of them are lawyers.

Almost all of the jurors chosen on Tuesday knew about Trump's other legal troubles, except for one woman. Out of the 18 jurors interviewed, she was the only one who didn't know about the additional charges.

When asked, none of the jurors expressed strong opinions about Trump or politics.

Trump's lawyers are looking into the social media accounts of potential jurors. After questioning the first 18 jurors in a process called voir dire, both sides can request the judge to dismiss jurors for cause.

Having jurors removed for cause is a crucial step in the legal process. This is because each side has the opportunity to dismiss up to 10 jurors through preemptory challenges. It's important to note that jurors removed for cause by the judge do not count towards the 10 preemptory challenges allowed.

Photo Illustration by Alberto Mier/CNN/Getty

Related article

Trump's first criminal case is currently in court. During the trial, Trump's legal team requested the judge to dismiss five jurors for cause. They claimed that the jurors had shown bias against Trump due to their alleged anti-Trump social media posts.

While the jurors remain anonymous to the public in this case, the lawyers were provided with the identities of the initial group of 96 potential jurors on Monday. This allowed Trump's legal team to review their public social media activity in preparation for any challenges they may present to the judge.

During the questioning of the jurors by former President Trump's attorney Todd Blanche, each juror was asked individually for their thoughts on Trump, unrelated to the case. Blanche then attempted to convince the judge that many jurors who claimed to have no opinion on Trump actually had conflicting information on their social media profiles.

Merchan was a bit doubtful, but he did agree that two jurors should be removed. One person had written "lock him up" on Facebook during Trump's presidency.

Regarding the three jurors that Merchan didn't strike, Trump's team still used their preemptory challenges to dismiss all of them. As of Tuesday, both Trump's team and the district attorney's office have four preemptory challenges left.

Trump gets admonished (again)

Trump’s courtroom conduct got him once again – briefly – in hot water with a judge.

Trump faced criticism for his behavior when Merchan spoke with a juror privately about her social media posts that were brought up by Trump's team. The posts showed her celebrating in New York after Joe Biden's victory in the 2020 election.

The juror expressed her belief that a juror's responsibility is to impartially assess the facts of a trial, regardless of personal opinions or political leanings.

After the juror left the courtroom, Merchan scolded Trump for speaking and gesturing towards the juror.

Merchan raised his voice and admonished Blanche, telling her that her client was audibly speaking. He emphasized that he would not tolerate any intimidation towards jurors in the courtroom.

The judge did not bring up any concerns about Trump's conduct when additional jurors were individually brought in. The moment passed without any further discussion.

However, it is important to highlight that the judge has recently extended his gag order in the case. This order prohibits Trump from discussing witnesses, as well as members of the district attorney's office and the court, including family and staff.

The district attorney will be requesting the judge to penalize Trump for breaking the gag order. This could involve fines of $1,000 and a caution that further violations may lead to imprisonment. The hearing is scheduled for next Tuesday, possibly right after the trial begins.

During the voir dire process, both sides had the opportunity to question potential jurors for 30 minutes. This process provided a glimpse into how each side is strategizing with the jury pool and, ultimately, the jury for the case. Prosecutors concentrated on the case at hand, while Trump's lawyers focused on defending Trump.

Assistant District Attorney Joshua Steinglass guided the jurors through the case, explaining how prosecutors will present their arguments during the trial. He mentioned that witnesses may not all recall past events in the same way and may have varying recollections of small details.

He then asked the jury pool to consider being realistic and not expecting witnesses to meet unrealistic standards. Steinglass invited anyone who couldn't accept this to speak up.

Some witnesses were mentioned to have an advantage, such as a tabloid publisher, an adult film star, and Trump's former lawyer Michael Cohen who was convicted of federal crimes, including lying to Congress. Steinglass then questioned the jurors if they could consider the testimony of a convicted felon with an unbiased perspective.

Witnesses have also written books, created podcasts, and taken part in documentaries.

It was emphasized that jurors can take into account these additional sources when evaluating a witness's credibility, but it should not be the sole factor they consider.

Steinglass emphasized the importance of waiting to hear all the witness testimony and evidence before making a decision about what to believe.

Meanwhile, Blanche dedicated most of his time to understanding how jurors perceive Trump. He inquired about jurors' opinions on the former president.

One man engaged in multiple conversations with Blanche, but he mostly avoided discussing his opinions on Trump. He believed that his views were irrelevant in a courtroom setting and he was able to separate his personal beliefs from his duty as a juror.

"I identify as a Democrat, but when I enter that courtroom, he is simply a defendant," the juror explained.

The juror was later struck for cause by the judge on a challenge from Trump’s team over his social media posts.

Jury selection could end – maybe – by the end of the week

Merchan has highlighted this week that the court schedule is flexible. Despite this, the judge aims to complete jury selection by the end of this week.

After swearing in the seven jurors on Tuesday, Merchan informed them that he anticipates starting opening statements next Monday. However, he stressed that the schedule is subject to change and the court will keep them updated.

He swore in a new panel of 96 jurors on Tuesday afternoon before sending them home for the day, which helped save time logistically for when they come back on Thursday morning.

The new jurors will follow the same process that the first panel went through in the past two days. They will be asked if they can remain impartial or if they have any conflicts, and will then be questioned by the judge and both sets of lawyers.

There’s no guarantee that will get us to a full jury of 12 jurors, plus six expected alternates: Only seven were selected out of the first panel of 96.

Editor's P/S:

The jury selection process in the Trump hush money case highlights the challenges and intricacies of ensuring a fair and impartial trial. Trump's legal team's scrutiny of potential jurors' social media posts raises concerns about the potential for bias to influence the outcome. The judge's warning against intimidating jurors emphasizes the importance of maintaining an unbiased environment during the proceedings.

The article also sheds light on the prosecution's strategy of presenting evidence and guiding jurors through the case, contrasting with Trump's lawyers' focus on defending his character. The emphasis on credibility and the consideration of witnesses' backgrounds and potential biases are crucial aspects of the jury selection process. The ongoing jury selection serves as a reminder of the importance of due process and the need for a thorough and fair trial, particularly in high-profile cases involving a former president.