The defense successfully challenged a man who said he owns a minority stake in the company that produced Michael Cohen's "Mea Culpa" podcast and said he has a "fairly negative" opinion of former President Trump based on his "negative, divisive rhetoric."

The judge confronted the man with several social media posts, including one referring to Trump with the words "sociopathic incompetence" and another saying of Trump, "I do believe that he is actually the devil."

The judge asked if that reflected his opinion. "I would say it's not far off base," the man replied, and he was immediately excused.

Judge Merchan excused a retired teacher who attended what he considered to be a women's rights rally near the United Nations but that the defense considered to be an anti-Trump rally.

"I did go there because I wanted to take pictures," he said.

The judge confronted him with his social media post of a sign from the rally with a comment that said. "My sentiments exactly."

Merchan said he wasn't sure those sentiments were anti-Trump sentiments, but said he had concerns about the nature of the rally, which, in one post, the man suggested was a "massive anti-Trump rally."

Alternate Juror No. 3 is an audio professional who offered to assist Judge Merchan with a microphone that kept cutting out. He expressed his opinion that "Donald Trump is a man, just like I am."

He said growth results from correcting their prior wrongful actions. "Every man should respond to their wrongdoings if found," he said. "If there is evidence found against a man, there should be consequences."

Alternate Juror No. 4 is a woman who said "I have no really strong opinions about President Trump."

She is married with two boys that she likes to take to Knicks games and Rubik's Cube speed competitions. She has been a contract specialist for 20 years, currently employed at a publicly traded fintech company.

The woman who participated in the Women's March and said Trump enabled homophobic and racist comments was excused. The judge called it "the safer course."

The has seated three more alternate jurors, joining the alternate juror who was seated Thursday. Two more are still needed.

One of the new alternates is a woman originally from Spain who said she has no strong opinions about former President Trump.

The woman said she is not on social media and doesn't watch the news besides skimming through headlines. She said her husband will inform her of the news and that "I don't really go in depth into anything"

The defense was trying to eliminate the young woman who said she heard Trump followers express homophobic and racist things at the boxing gym.

"It's almost like they're devout to him," the woman said of Trump's followers. She is currently being questioned by the judge to assess her views and her ability to be fair and impartial.

If former President Trump opts to testify in the trial, prosecutors want to question him about all the times he has been held liable in civil court, according to a new court filing in the case.

Prosecutors have asked Judge Juan Merchan to hold a hearing, known as a Sandoval hearing, to determine the scope of what they can ask Trump on cross-examination.

"We are prepared to do a Sandoval hearing now, later or whenever the court desires," Assistant District Attorney Joshua Steinglass said on Monday.

The judge has not set a date for the hearing but suggested it could be Friday.

In their filing, prosecutors outlined the civil cases they'd like to bring up during the criminal trial, including the $464 million judgment in Trump's civil fraud case, the defamation and battery cases brought by E. Jean Carroll and a lawsuit Trump filed against Hillary Clinton claiming she conspired to rig the 2016 election, for which Trump and his lawyers faced legal sanctions after the case was thrown out as frivolous.

Prosecutors also want to question Trump about a criminal case his company lost in 2022, when the Trump Organization was convicted of tax evasion by providing non-cash compensation to top executives.

They also want to bring up a civil case the New York attorney general won against the Trump Foundation for misusing charitable donations.