Former President Trump has filed a new emergency appeal to change the venue of his criminal trial.

Oral arguments are scheduled for this afternoon to determine whether the trial should be temporarily paused.

The motion is expected to cite some of the responses prospective jurors gave during the jury selection process.

Trump's prior attempts to move the trial out of Manhattan have failed.

A man apparently set himself on fire outside the courthouse while Trump was inside during the trial.

The person was badly burned and taken away from the scene on a stretcher.

It was not immediately clear if the incident was related to the criminal proceedings.

The hearing on the scope of former President Trump's potential testimony is scheduled to take place today at 3:15 p.m. ET

Known as a Sandoval hearing, it will determine the extent of the prosecution's cross-examination.

Prosecutors have indicated they would like to question Trump about matters beyond the criminal case, including his recent $454 million civil fraud judgment, the two verdicts in the E. Jean Carroll cases and a lawsuit he filed against Hillary Clinton that resulted in legal sanctions.

The six alternate jurors have been sworn in, raising their hands.

"We have now completed jury selection for this case," Judge Merchan said.

The alternate jurors are five women and one man.

Alternate Juror No. 6 lives on the Upper East Side and is a project manager for a construction company and a mother of three children who "does whatever my kids want me to do in my spare time."

Her father was convicted of a federal crime when she was in high school. She said she was "shielded" from the details at the time.

Former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker testified that he believed Donald Trump had knowledge about the $150,000 contract to buy Karen McDougal's silence regarding an alleged year-long affair.

"Do you know if anyone else besides Michael Cohen had any knowledge of this contract?" prosecutor Joshua Steinglass asked.

"Yes, I believe Donald Trump did," Pecker responded.

"Was your principal purpose to suppress the story to prevent it from influencing the election?" Steinglass asked.

"Yes," Pecker said.

"Were you aware that expenditures by corporations made for the purpose of influencing an election made in coordination with or at the request of a candidate or campaign were unlawful?" Steinglass asked.

Pecker said he was aware and confirmed that the Enquirer's parent company, AMI, never reported the payment to the Federal Election Commission.

"We purchased the story so it wouldn't be published by any other organization," Pecker said.

"Why did you not want it to be published by any other organization?" Steinglass asked.

"We didn't want the story to embarrass Mr. Trump or embarrass or hurt the campaign," Pecker said.

"Who is we?" Steinglass followed up.

"Myself and Michael Cohen," Pecker said.

According to Pecker, AMI agreed to the $150,000 payment on the promise that Donald Trump or the Trump Organization would reimburse AMI for the payment. He frequently followed up with Cohen about the reimbursement and got a similar answer from Cohen.

"Why are you worried? I am your friend. The boss will take care of it," Pecker said about Cohen's response.