Last month, former President Donald Trump's attorneys once again asked New York Judge Juan Merchan for a third time to recuse himself from presiding over the "hush money" case because of the conflict of interest created by his Democrat-aligned political activist daughter.

On Wednesday, for the third time since the case began, Judge Merchan rejected that request from Trump's lawyers and insisted, once again, that his daughter's partisanship had no bearing on his decision-making in the case, Reuters reported.

The decision sets the stage for a sentencing hearing scheduled for mid-September, less than two months before the election, in which Merchan may choose to order the former president and current Republican nominee to serve a prison term following a guilty verdict in May on 34 felony counts of business records falsification.

Trump urges Merchan to recuse himself for third time

In late July, after Vice President Kamala Harris was elevated to become the presumptive Democratic nominee following President Joe Biden's withdrawal from the race, former President Trump's attorneys reiterated their previously rejected concerns about a conflict of interest caused by the political advertising and consultancy work, particularly in support of Harris, of Judge Merchan's daughter Loren.

In a three-page decision released Wednesday, Merchan first referenced his two prior denials of recusal requests along with a citation to an Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics' opinion which stated that the political activities of the judge's relatives were not grounds for recusal, and further noted that this third recusal request also called for an end to the Trump gag order previously upheld by an appellate court.

"This argument does not merit extensive discussion since it does not credibly purport to support the motion for recusal. Rather, it would appear to be nothing more than an attempt to air grievances against this Court's rulings," Merchan wrote. "Defendant has litigated this Court's Order Restricting Extrajudicial Statements numerous times, not only with this Court, but with New York's appellate courts as well."

"Defendant's second argument is that the alleged relationship between Vice President Kamala Harris and a member of this Court's family warrants recusal. The Court notes that this same argument was already made by Defendant in his first two motions for recusal," he continued. "However, Defendant contends that the alleged conflict is mote egregious now that Vice President I(amala Harris has been elevated to "Presumptive nominee of the Democratic Party" for President."

"Defendant's motion is again DENIED"

Seeing "no need to repeat the legal analysis" of the prior recusal rejections, Judge Merchan wrote, "Stated plainly, Defendant's arguments are nothing more than a repetition of stale and unsubstantiated claims."

"This Court now reiterates for the third time, that which should already be clear -- innuendo and mischaracterizations do not a conflict create. Recusal
is therefore not necessary, much less required," he continued and further noted, "As has been the standard throughout the pendency of this case, this Court will continue to base its rulings on the evidence and the law, without fear or favor, casting aside undue influence."

"Defendant has provided nothing new for this Court to consider. Counsel has merely repeated arguments that have already been denied by this and higher courts," Merchan added. "Defense Counsel's reliance, and apparent citation to his own prior affirmation, rife with inaccuracies and unsubstantiated claims, is unavailing. As such, Defendant's motion is again DENIED."

Case now proceeds to sentencing

The Hill reported that in response to Judge Merchan's decision, Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung said in a statement, "The acting Justice has consistently and recklessly displayed his personal bias against President Trump throughout the case, including issuing an illegal, unconstitutional, and election-interfering Gag Order against the President and his campaign, and admitting constitutionally prohibited 'evidence' at trial."

"The Highly-Conflicted Judge should have long ago recused himself from this case," the spokesman added.

Merchan's decision clears the way, according to Newsweek, for the judge to also likely reject Trump's claimed immunity from prosecution, based on the Supreme Court's recent ruling on that particular question, and proceed to sentencing on September 18.

It is strongly suspected by some that Merchan will, less than two months before the election, order the GOP nominee to serve time in prison -- which will provide Democrats and media the opportunity to refer to him as a "convicted felon sentenced to prison" -- though it is unlikely that Trump will actually be immediately incarcerated given the probability of an immediate appeal and the grant of bail or an emergency stay pending that appeal.