Former President Donald Trump was scheduled to be sentenced on July 11 following his conviction for falsifying business records.

However, the former president scored a legal victory this week when his sentencing hearing was pushed back by more than two months. 

New hearing date set for September 18

According to Fox News, that announcement came in the form of a letter sent on Tuesday by Judge Juan Merchan to Trump's defense team and Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg.

"The July 11, 2024, sentencing date is therefore vacated," Merchan wrote in a letter to Trump attorneys and New York prosecutors.

"The Court's decision will be rendered off-calendar on September 6, 2024, and the matter is adjourned to September 18, 2024, at 10:00 a.m. for the imposition of sentence, if such is still necessary, or other proceedings," the judge added.

Merchan's letter came after the New York Post reported that Trump's attorneys sent a letter of their own in which they asked that the hearing be pushed back.

Arguments over recent Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity

New York Magazine noted how Bragg responded to the Trump team's request by announcing that his office would not oppose the defense's rescheduling request.

NEW - The Manhattan DA’s office said Tuesday it would not oppose Trump’s request to file a motion arguing his conviction should be tossed, a move that will almost certainly delay Trump’s sentencing, which is currently set for July 11. Reporting w/ @AaronKatersky & @PCCharalambous pic.twitter.com/z6VzU8L2ug

— Katherine Faulders (@KFaulders) July 2, 2024

As Fox News explained, the delay is being granted so that a defense motion to dismiss Trump's conviction can be considered.

That motion is based on a Supreme Court ruling this week which concluded that former presidents enjoy a high degree of legal immunity for official acts taken while in office.

Supreme Court distinguishes between a president's official and unofficial acts

"We conclude that under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power requires that a former President have some immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts during his tenure in office," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in his majority opinion.

"At least with respect to the President's exercise of his core constitutional powers, this immunity must be absolute," the chief justice asserted.

However, Roberts then went on to distinguish between actions outside the president's exclusive authority and unofficial acts.

He explained that official but non-constitutionally core actions enjoy "presumptive" immunity whereas unofficial acts are not immune from prosecution.