President Trump’s legal team has launched a strategic bid to erase his New York hush money conviction by transferring the case to federal court, leveraging new Supreme Court guidance on presidential immunity that could nullify the entire politically-motivated prosecution.
Key Takeaways
- President Trump is seeking to move his state criminal case to federal court based on presidential immunity grounds that could invalidate his conviction
- Trump’s legal team argues that the Supreme Court’s recent presidential immunity decision should have prevented certain evidence from being used in his trial
- Despite receiving no jail time or fines, Trump remains a convicted felon under state law, which this appeal aims to rectify
- The Department of Justice supports Trump’s effort while Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg opposes it, claiming the appeal is moot
- A successful appeal could establish important precedents regarding presidential immunity and federal jurisdiction
Presidential Immunity Strategy at Center of Appeal
President Trump’s attorneys presented oral arguments on June 11, 2025, before a three-judge panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, seeking to transfer his New York hush money case to federal court. This legal maneuver comes after Trump was convicted on 34 counts of business fraud related to payments made to Stormy Daniels, in what many conservatives consider a politically-motivated prosecution that set a dangerous precedent against a sitting president.
At the heart of the appeal is a Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity that was issued after Trump’s conviction. His legal team contends this ruling provides “good cause” for post-trial removal to federal court, as the activities in question were intertwined with his official duties as president. The timing of this Supreme Court decision is crucial, as it established new legal parameters that weren’t available during the original trial.
JUST PUBLISHED: Trump Appeals Bogus 'Hush Money' Conviction. PULSE POINTS:
❓What Happened: President Donald J. Trump’s attorneys are appealing his conviction in a so-called hush money case in New York, seeking to move it to federal court following last year's U.S. Supreme Court…— The National Pulse (@TheNatPulse) June 11, 2025
Legal Arguments for Federal Jurisdiction
Trump’s attorney Jeff Wall made a compelling case for federal jurisdiction, telling the court: “The federal officer is entitled to a federal forum, not to have those arguments heard in state court. And if that’s true for a normal federal officer in a normal criminal prosecution, it certainly ought to be true for the president of the United States and for what we can all recognize is an anomalous, one-of-its kind prosecution.”
Wall further argued that the Supreme Court’s recent decision on presidential immunity should invalidate evidence used against Trump during his trial. “There was evidence that came in a trial that triggered an immunity that the Supreme Court recognized after trial. If an intervening decision of the Supreme Court says that a case is of the kind that should come into federal court, of course you trigger the removal statute,” Wall explained.
The Department of Justice has taken the unusual step of supporting President Trump’s position, acknowledging the unique constitutional questions at stake. However, the panel hearing the case consists of judges appointed by former President Obama and President Biden, raising concerns about potential political bias in their eventual ruling.
Manhattan DA’s Opposition and Case Status
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office strongly opposes moving the case to federal court, especially after sentencing has already occurred. Steven Wu, representing Bragg’s office, argued: “It is not to divert a state criminal proceeding into a federal court for direct appellate review. That offends fundamental principles of respect for state sovereignty over the criminal process.”
Despite receiving an unconditional discharge with no jail time, probation, or fines, President Trump remains a convicted felon under state law. His legal team is not only pursuing this jurisdictional appeal but is also directly appealing the conviction itself, with arguments due by late July. Even if the case moves to federal court, it would still technically remain a state conviction, potentially limiting Trump’s ability to issue a self-pardon.
The three-judge panel did not immediately rule following oral arguments, but their decision could fundamentally reshape the legal landscape surrounding presidential immunity and the ability of state prosecutors to target presidents for actions connected to their official duties. For President Trump’s supporters, this appeal represents an important opportunity to correct what many view as an unprecedented abuse of prosecutorial power against a sitting president.
