New York prosecutors are asking for a delay until at least 2029 in the case of New York v. Trump, as the president’s lawyers prepare to dismiss the case entirely.

Prosecutors wrote a letter Tuesday to Judge Juan Merchan, who last week agreed to grant an extension of all deadlines related to Trump’s sentencing proceedings in the final months before he takes office.

Merchan granted the request, suspending all deadlines, including the Nov. 26 sentencing date, for consideration of the ramifications of his election as president.

Prosecutors had asked for a pause in the proceedings, which they said would allow them to better assess the impact of Trump’s new status as president-elect.

“As a result of the November 5, 2024 election, Defendant’s inauguration as President will take place on January 20, 2025,” Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg wrote to Merchan on Tuesday.

“Given the need to balance competing constitutional interests, various non-dismissal options should be taken into account that could address the concerns raised by the pending post-trial criminal proceedings during the presidency, such as postponing all remaining criminal proceedings until after the presidency. the end of defendant’s upcoming presidential term,” Bragg wrote.

Trump, who will be sworn in as the 47th president of the United States on January 20, 2025, will serve as commander in chief until 2029.

Bragg said his team would not oppose Trump’s request to stay further proceedings pending his lawyers’ dismissal request.

Trump spokesman Steven Cheung told Fox News Digital that “this is a total and final victory for President Trump and the American people who elected him in a landslide.”

“The Manhattan district attorney has admitted that this witch hunt cannot continue,” said Cheung, who was tapped to serve as White House communications director. “The lawless case is now stayed and President Trump’s legal team is working to have the case dismissed once and for all.”

Bragg noted that New York prosecutors plan to oppose Trump’s lawyers’ request to dismiss the case entirely.

Trump looks on during the UFC 309 event at Madison Square Garden on Nov. 16, 2024, in New York City. (Photo by Chris Unger/Zuffa LLC)

WHERE DOES TRUMP’S CONVICTION STAND IN NEW YORK AFTER THE HUGE ELECTION WIN?

Trump’s lawyers, who filed a motion to dismiss the charges entirely, also supported the delay.

Trump pleaded not guilty on all 34 counts of falsifying corporate documents in the first degree, but was found guilty in May after an unprecedented six-week criminal trial in New York.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg speaks to the media after a jury found Trump guilty of 34 felony counts of falsifying company records on Thursday, May 30, 2024, in New York. (AP/Seth Wenig)

Trump’s lawyers have asked Merchan to overturn the guilty verdict, citing the United States Supreme Court’s decision that former presidents have significant immunity from prosecution for acts of official office. Trump’s legal team argued that certain evidence presented during the trial by Bragg and New York prosecutors should not have been admitted because they were “official acts.”

Specifically, Trump attorney Todd Blanche argued that the testimony of former White House communications director Hope Hicks; former special assistant to President Madeleine Westerhout; testimony on the Special Counsel’s Office and Congressional Investigations and the pardon power; testimony on President Trump’s response to FEC investigations; his presidential Twitter posts and other related testimony were admitted inadmissible at trial.

Trump pleaded not guilty to all 34 counts of first-degree falsifying corporate records, but was found guilty in May after an unprecedented six-week criminal trial in New York. (AP/Evan Vucci)

Lawyers for Trump also pointed to Trump’s disclosures to the Office of Government Ethics as president.

TRUMP REQUESTS NY JUDGE FOR GUILTY VERDICT, CHARGE AFTER SCOTUS IMMUNITY EXCLUSION

Blanche said that “evidence from official acts” that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg presented to the grand jury was “contrary to Trump’s interests” because presidents “cannot be indicted based on conduct from which they are immune.” are subject to prosecution,’” the motion said. “The presidential immunity doctrine recognized by Trump covers all ‘criminal proceedings,’ including grand jury proceedings when a prosecutor ‘seeks to indict’ a former president using evidence of official acts.”

Blanche argued that Bragg “violated the presidential immunity doctrine by using similar evidence of official acts in the grand jury proceedings that gave rise to the politically motivated charges in this case.”

“Because a charge so tainted cannot stand, the charges must be dismissed,” Blanche argued.

Image of Judge Juan Merchan imposed over a courtroom. (AP)

Blanche also explained that the Supreme Court’s decision does not allow for an “overwhelming evidence” or “harmless error” exception to “the profound institutional interests at stake.”

The Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision on presidential immunity stemmed from a question arising from charges against Trump in a separate federal case brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith regarding the events of January 6, 2021 and any efforts to to overturn the presidential election. results of the 2020 elections.

Trump has pleaded not guilty to all charges in that case.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Smith is wrapping up his cases against Trump following his election as the 47th president of the United States.

Smith’s secret dossier case against Trump was dismissed earlier this year by a federal judge in Florida, who ruled that the special counsel was unlawfully appointed.