Describing conditions as “fraught with complexities”, a New York judge on Friday delayed Donald Trump’s sentencing on charges stemming from hush money paid to an adult film star until 26 November. Trump, the Republican nominee for president, had asked Justice Juan Merchan to push back his sentencing date until after the US election. Trump had previously been scheduled to be sentenced on 18 September, less than two months before election day. Trump’s lawyers in August argued there would not be enough time before the sentencing for the defense to potentially appeal Merchan’s forthcoming ruling on Trump’s request to overturn the conviction due to the US supreme court’s landmark decision on presidential immunity. While Merchan noted that Trump’s attorneys had “repeat[ed] a litany of perceived and unsubstantiated grievances from previous filings that do not merit this Court’s attention”, Merchan’s response acknowledged that the combination of an upcoming presidential election and the supreme court’s ruling had “render[ed] the requirements of a sentencing hearing, should one be necessary, difficult to execute”. Merchan had been scheduled to rule on that motion on 16 September. The supreme court’s 6-3 ruling, which related to a separate criminal case Trump faces, found that presidents cannot be criminally prosecuted for their official acts, and that evidence of presidents’ official actions cannot be used to help prove criminal cases involving unofficial actions. Trump held a press conference in Manhattan at noon on Friday, not to address Merchan’s ruling but to discuss the appellate hearing held earlier in the day in the US second court of appeals in New York. Trump’s attorney asked for a new trial in the E Jean Carroll sexual abuse and defamation case, where he faces a multimillion-dollar verdict for assaulting the writer in the mid-90s and then defaming her. In a nearly hour-long diatribe, Trump repeatedly claimed that he never assaulted Carroll. “She wrote a book and made a ridiculous story up,” Trump said. “She made up a story. Fabricated, 100% that I attacked her at Bergdorf Goodman.” Statements similar to these resulted in a judgment of $83.3m in damages awarded to Carroll in a separate defamation lawsuit earlier this year. That case is also under appeal. Trump did not address the delay of his sentencing in the hush-money case, saying only that “the case is a disgrace” that “should never have been brought”. Prosecutors with Bragg’s office argued their case involved Trump’s personal conduct, not official acts, so there was no reason to overturn the verdict. But they took no position on Trump’s request to delay sentencing, saying in a 16 August filing they deferred to Merchan on the question. The prosecutors said an appellate court could delay the sentencing anyway to give itself time to consider Trump’s arguments, a move they said would be “disruptive”. Merchan interpreted Bragg’s response to the request as a signal of support for a delay. “[A] careful reading of that response can fairly be construed as a joinder of the motion,” Merchan wrote. “The public’s confidence in the integrity of our judicial system demands a sentencing hearing that is entirely focused on the verdict of the jury and the weighing of aggravating and mitigating factors free from distraction or distortion.” Trump is the first former president to be convicted of a felony. He faces up to four years in prison, though Merchan could sentence him to far less time or assign probation and community service instead. The trial itself was a spectacle. Trump’s verbal attacks on Merchan, his daughter, the court and others ultimately led Merchan to issue a gag order on the former president barring him from similar commentary. A delay means voters cannot assess the impact of his sentence before the election. Democrats would have been expected to highlight the sentencing as yet another sign of Trump’s unfitness for office, while Republicans would have cast it as a sign of political martyrdom fighting a partisan, corrupt government. “Judge Merchan should have sentenced Trump on 9/18 and then allowed him to remain out of custody while his appeals are pending,” said the MSNBC legal analyst Katie Phang in reaction to the ruling. “This delay only serves to embolden Trump and fuels the narrative that there was something afoul in this case.”