Back in January, President Trump was sentenced on a conviction. He’s trying to get it overturned.
And President Trump’s conviction appeal has just received a huge update.
Trump’s Hush Money Case Appeal Arrives & Lawyers Prepare
President Donald Trump’s legal team is set to appear before a three-judge panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday, pressing to shift his New York hush money case to federal court. The appeal, rooted in a recent Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity, seeks to challenge the conviction that has marked Trump as a felon in a case many view as a politically charged effort to tarnish his presidency.
The case stems from Trump’s 2024 conviction on 34 counts of falsifying business records, tied to a 2016 payment made by his then-attorney, Michael Cohen, to adult film star Stormy Daniels. The payment, prosecutors alleged, was intended to silence Daniels about an alleged affair, which Trump has consistently denied. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, a Democrat, pursued the charges, leading to Trump’s conviction last May. Despite the verdict, Trump received an unconditional discharge in January, just days before his second inauguration, sparing him jail time, probation, or fines.
Trump’s legal team argues that the prosecution’s case hinged on actions taken during his first term as president, which they claim fall under the umbrella of official acts protected by the Supreme Court’s July ruling on presidential immunity. That decision granted immunity for certain official acts but not for unofficial ones, creating a legal gray area that Trump’s attorneys are now leveraging. They assert that the case belongs in federal court, where Trump can fully exercise his immunity claims, potentially overturning the conviction.
“President Trump had good cause to pursue a post-trial removal for a simple reason: he could not have raised any of the arguments set forth herein until well after his trial began,” Trump’s attorneys wrote in their court filings. The filing emphasizes that the Supreme Court’s ruling, issued after Trump’s conviction, provides new grounds for moving the case. This marks Trump’s second attempt to transfer the case to federal court, following an earlier unsuccessful effort before the trial.
The Department of Justice, in a notable move, filed an amicus brief in March supporting Trump’s push for federal jurisdiction. The brief suggests that the federal government sees merit in examining whether the case infringes on presidential prerogatives, lending weight to Trump’s argument. This alignment has fueled speculation that the case could set a precedent for how legal challenges against sitting presidents are handled, particularly when state-level prosecutions intersect with federal authority.
Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg’s office, however, remains steadfast in opposing the transfer. They argue that the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling does not apply to this case, as the falsification of business records pertains to Trump’s personal conduct, not official acts. Bragg’s team also contends that Trump’s delay in renewing his push for federal jurisdiction—waiting two months after the Supreme Court decision—demonstrates a “lack of diligence.” They further argue that Trump’s sentence of unconditional discharge renders the appeal largely moot.
“Even if removal were still formally available here, there were ample grounds supporting the district court’s finding of lack of good cause to permit defendant to file a second, untimely notice of removal,” Bragg’s office wrote in court filings. The statement reflects their confidence that the case was appropriately handled in state court and that Trump’s latest maneuver is a delay tactic rather than a substantive legal challenge.
Trump’s supporters view the case as a textbook example of law-fare, with critics of Bragg arguing that the prosecution was driven by political motives rather than legal merit. The conviction, they claim, was an attempt to weaken Trump’s standing ahead of his 2024 reelection campaign, which he ultimately won. The appeal now offers Trump a chance to challenge what he has long called a “witch hunt,” a narrative that resonates with his base and frames the legal battle as a defense of presidential authority.
The stakes of the appeal extend beyond Trump’s personal legal woes. A successful move to federal court could not only jeopardize the conviction but also establish a precedent for how state prosecutors can pursue cases against former or sitting presidents. Legal analysts suggest that a federal court ruling in Trump’s favor might limit the ability of state-level officials to target federal officeholders, particularly when official acts are involved.
The appeal also highlights the tension between state and federal powers, a recurring theme in Trump’s legal battles. His attorneys argue that allowing state prosecutors to delve into a president’s official actions risks undermining the executive branch’s ability to function without fear of politically motivated litigation. This perspective has gained traction among those who see the case as an overreach by Bragg’s office.
The panel’s decision could either reinforce the state’s authority to prosecute Trump or shift the case to a federal arena, where his immunity claims might find a more favorable audience.
CNN's legal expert Elie Honig believes Trump's got lots of good options available to him to appeal his bogus 'hush money' felony convictions. pic.twitter.com/9O4Lk4pVww
— USA Features Media (@UsaFeatures) January 15, 2025
Be sure to get any more big updates on this appeal from Donald Trump right here on the Conservative Column.
