Following a break, Judge Merchan told the parties that he had worked through his own notes and asked the lawyers for each side to weigh in on what he might have missed.

The defense sought an instruction about former President Trump regarding bias.

"We don't think that this is necessary, this charge," prosecutor Josh Steinglass said in response. "I don't think instructing the jury that they shouldn't hold bias against the defendant is necessary -- voir dire has satisfied this problem, I think."

The defense also sought an instruction that hush money payments are not inherently illegal. Prosecutors opposed it, arguing the request amounts to the judge making the defense argument for them.

Defense attorney Emil Bove also asked for an instruction that "hush money is not illegal."

"What the defense is asking," Colangelo responded, "is for you to make their argument for them."

The judge agreed with Colangelo, saying that including that language would be "taking it too far."

"I don't think it's necessary," Merchan said.

Defense attorney Emil Bove argued that the jury should not consider Michael Cohen's tax crimes as one of the crimes Trump advanced by allegedly falsifying business records when he repaid Cohen for the Stormy Daniels hush payment.

Bove argued that Cohen was unaware of the alleged tax crimes when then-Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg "grossed up" his reimbursement to accommodate for taxes on the payment.

Cohen testified he did not think of the tax law at the time, telling jurors, "I just wanted to get my money back."

Defense attorney Emil Bove tried to make the argument that this particular case is unusual because Trump is not a typical defendant.

Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo responded that's precisely why the standard language should be used.

"No one is above the law," he said.

Judge Merchan settled the matter and ruled against the defense.

"I understand what you mean when you say it's an important case," he said. "But what you're asking me to do is to change the law, and I'm not going to do that."

Discussing the August 2015 meeting in Trump Tower where prosecutors say Trump, Michael Cohen and then-National Enquirer publisher David Pecker agreed to the criminal conspiracy, defense attorney Emil Bove argued Trump's "mere presence" at a 2015 meeting at Trump Tower with David Pecker and Michael Cohen where the alleged conspiracy was hatched "could very much be part of the defense here."

Bove said "there's nothing criminal about that at all," despite prosecutors arguing it's where the catch-and-kill scheme originated.

Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo argued there is no way the jury could interpret the meeting as a "high minded conversation about democracy."

Judge Merchan denied a request from defense lawyers to broaden the scope of testimony from their expert witness Bradley Smith, who is an expert on campaign finance regulations.

On Thursday, defense lawyers asked Merchan to allow Smith to testify about various terms related to federal campaign finance laws. Merchan denied the request, citing long standing precedent prohibiting witness testimony about the law.

"An expert is not permitted to present or interpret the law," Merchan said.

Merchan also expressed concerns about Smith's testimony prompting a "battle of the experts" between Smith and an expert called by prosecutors, which Merchan said would confuse the jury.

Merchan said that Smith could still testify, as long as he follows the limits imposed in his pretrial ruling on the case's motions in limine.

"The court will monitor this testimony closely to ensure full compliance," Merchan said in a pretrial ruling. "Any deviation from this ruling could result in sanction up to and including striking the expert's entire testimony."

Trump, sitting at the defense table, shook his head after the judge announced his ruling.