NEW YORK – Two presidential campaigns ago, Donald Trump faced a brewing sex scandal that threatened to derail his bid for the White House.

On Feb 15, a New York judge ensured that the very same scandal will loom over his latest run for president, scheduling for March 25 a trial that could jeopardise his campaign – and his freedom.

Judge Juan Manuel Merchan rejected Trump’s bid to throw out the Manhattan district attorney’s criminal charges against him that stem from a hush money payment to porn actress Stormy Daniels in 2016.

By setting a trial date for March, Judge Merchan cleared the way for the first prosecution of a former United States president in the nation’s history.

The ruling is a crucial victory for District Attorney Alvin Bragg.

He said he was “pleased” by the judge’s decision and was looking forward to the trial, where Trump is facing 34 felony charges and, if convicted, a maximum sentence of four years in prison.

Overall, the former president is facing 91 felony counts across four criminal indictments from prosecutors in Washington, Florida and Georgia, as well as Manhattan.

Unlike the federal cases in Washington and Florida, which Trump could try to shut down should he regain the White House, Mr Bragg’s case is insulated from federal intervention.

Trump would not be able to pardon himself or otherwise deploy the presidency as a legal shield.

Trump attended the Manhattan hearing on Feb 15 and was more subdued than usual, sitting quietly with his arms at his sides as the judge scheduled the trial.

His lawyers objected fiercely to the judge’s decision that jury selection should begin on March 25, noting that the six-week trial would conflict with Trump’s presidential campaign and with other court cases.

But Judge Merchan was impatient with such arguments.

He was also curt in denying the defence’s request to throw out the case.

Trump’s lawyers had derided it as “discombobulated” and “marred by legal defects and procedural failures”.

The judge declined to dismiss the charges, without elaborating.

The prosecutors have invoked potential violations of federal election law – under the theory that the payout served as an illegal donation to Trump’s campaign – as well as a state election law that bars any conspiracy to promote “the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means”.

Judge Merchan endorsed that theory of the case. NYTIMES