A former tabloid newspaper publisher is set to resume his testimony in the historic criminal trial of Donald Trump in New York City.
David Pecker ran the National Enquirer, which prosecutors say suppressed negative stories about Mr Trump to benefit his 2016 election chances.
The case relates to hush-money paid to a porn star who Mr Trump allegedly had sex with – though he denies doing so.
The court will also hear whether Mr Trump has broken the judge’s gag order.
He is accused by the prosecution of routinely breaking a restriction that prevents him from publicly attacking witnesses, prosecutors and relatives of court staff.
The partial order was earlier imposed by Judge Juan Merchan, the seasoned New York jurist presiding over the trial. Mr Trump has continued to post about those involved in the case online.
The legal case has seen Mr Trump accused of trying to cover up a $130,000 (£104,500) payment to porn star Stormy Daniels before he won the race for the White House back in 2016.
Ms Daniels alleges that she had sex with Mr Trump in 2006 and that she was paid by his lawyer to stay quiet about it ahead of the pivotal vote.
The trial centres on a reimbursement Mr Trump made to his former personal lawyer and “fixer”, Michael Cohen.
Cohen claims he was directed to pay Ms Daniels $130,000 in exchange for her silence about her alleged affair with Mr Trump.
Hush money payments are not illegal. But prosecutors allege that Mr Trump committed a crime by improperly recording the money with which he reimbursed Cohen as legal expenses.
They describe this as an effort to unlawfully influence the 2016 vote – which is what escalates the allegation into a more serious felony.
“It was election fraud, pure and simple,” a lawyer told the jury on Monday during opening statements by both legal teams.
Mr Trump has pleaded not guilty to 34 counts of falsifying business records.
Setting out the case for the defence, Mr Trump’s lawyer said his client was “cloaked in innocence”, had committed no crimes, and that it was not illegal to try to influence an election.
The defence also sought to cast prosecutors’ star witness – Mr Cohen – as untrustworthy.