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.

On his day off from his New York criminal trial, Donald Trump is complaining about the jury selection process on his social media platform.

The former president is claiming that in the process of picking the jury, he doesn't have enough strikes -- i.e., allowances to remove prospective jurors that his legal team objects to.

"I thought STRIKES were supposed to be 'unlimited' when we were picking our jury?" Trump wrote on his social media platform. "I was then told we only had 10, not nearly enough when we were purposely given the 2nd Worst Venue in the Country."

Trump does get unlimited strikes to remove a juror for cause, which means for a specified reason -- but both the defense and prosecutors have a limited number of peremptory challenges, which allow for the removal of a juror for any reason.

-Soo Rin Kim, Lalee Ibssa and Peter Charalambous

Court is not in session today in former President Trump's criminal hush money trial, as the trial schedule has a full-day recess every Wednesday.

Yesterday saw the first seven jurors in the case seated. Eleven more jurors -- six of them alternates -- remain to be chosen.

The selection of the first jurors was one of the four big takeaways from Day 2 of the trial Tuesday.

Former President Donald Trump vowed to continue his effort to have the judge overseeing his case removed, as he exited the courtroom after a lengthy trial day.

"We are going to continue our fight against this judge," Trump told reporters, acknowledging he is having a "hard time with the New York state system."

Judge Juan Merchan denied Trump's second recusal motion on Monday, and an appellate court denied his effort to have the case delayed over the recusal effort last week.

"We have a very conflicted, highly conflicted judge. He shouldn't be on the case. He's rushing this trail, and he's doing as much as he can for the Democrats," Trump said, without evidence, before his motorcade departed the courthouse.

Former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker described one of the most heated moments so far during the catch-and-kill arrangement between him, Donald Trump and Trump's then-attorney Michael Cohen.

When Cohen approached Pecker with a plan to reimburse the National Enquirer for buying the exclusive rights to Karen McDougal's story, the two men drew up paperwork in which Cohen would repay the Enquirer's parent company, AMI, through a shell company he created, Pecker said.

But Pecker testified that he had a change of heart after consulting with his general counsel.

"I called Michael Cohen and I said to him that the agreement we signed -- the deal was off. I am not going forward, it is a bad idea," Pecker testified. "I want you to rip up the agreement."

"He was very, very, angry. Very upset, screaming basically at me. And I said, I'm not going forward with this agreement, rip it up," Pecker said.

Pecker said Michael Cohen then brought up "the boss."

"And Michael Cohen said, the boss is going to be very angry with you. And I said, I'm sorry, I am not going forward. The deal is off," Pecker recounted. "And he said, I can't believe it. I'm a lawyer, I'm your friend. I don't understand why you're not going forward. I said I am not going forward. Period."

Pecker previously described at length that he was aware that the National Enquirer's payment to Karen McDougal in order to catch and kill her story for the benefit of Trump's campaign would amount to an illegal campaign contribution -- softening his tone when he testified to this.