It is interesting what happens when an ethics complaint is filed against the presiding judge that contains proof the judge's daughter received a payment from the Harris campaign on July 30, nine days after Harris replaced President Joe Biden atop the Democratic ticket.
from the filed complaint:
"The Code of Conduct, specifically § 100.3(E)(1)(d)(iii), dictates that a judge must recuse from a case where a relative up to and including the sixth degree has a financial interest in the outcome of the case. Ms. Merchan is related to Justice Merchan in the first degree."
If Judge Merchan had sentenced Trump on September 18, and Trump's lawyers had managed to get the sentence quickly thrown out due to Judge Merchan's violation of § 100.3(E)(1)(d)(iii), it would have proved true the claims of bias right before people started casting ballots. The narrative that Harris had bought the judge would be everywhere.
You can tell that is exactly what Judge Merchan was thinking when he issued the statement along with the delay saying "The Court is a fair, impartial, and apolitical institution. Adjourning decision on the motion and sentencing, if such is required, should dispel any suggestion that the Court will have issued any decision or imposed sentence either to gave an advantage to, or create a disadvantage for, any political party and/or any candidate for any office".