A Clinton-appointed federal judge denied President Trump's latest effort to transfer his New York criminal conviction to federal court, ruling for the third time that the case belongs in state hands, a decision Trump's legal team immediately appealed.
U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein issued the ruling Friday from the federal bench in Manhattan, dismissing Trump's arguments that the Supreme Court's presidential immunity decision should shield him from the 34-count conviction for falsifying business records. Hellerstein found that Trump waited too long and that the legal grounds he raised were recycled from earlier, failed attempts.
Trump's attorneys filed an appeal to the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals within hours, vowing to overturn what they called a "baseless and lawless decision." The Manhattan District Attorney's office, led by Democrat Alvin Bragg, declined to comment on the ruling.
The judge's written order left little room for ambiguity. Hellerstein wrote:
"The grounds for a second removal cited by Defendant, Donald J. Trump, are neither new nor legally sufficient. He has failed to show good cause and diligence."
Trump's central argument rested on the Supreme Court's landmark ruling that former presidents enjoy broad criminal immunity for official acts. His legal team contended that the immunity decision should invalidate the New York conviction entirely and that a federal court, not a state court, was the proper forum to decide the question.
Hellerstein disagreed in pointed language, as the Washington Examiner reported:
"They do not; paying hush money to an adult film star or engaging in a cover-up of an embarrassment are not subsumed in presidential immunity."
That framing is worth pausing on. The judge treated the underlying conduct, a $130,000 payment to Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election to cover up an alleged affair, as personal, not presidential. Every judge who has considered the immunity argument directly in this case has reached the same conclusion.
Friday's order marked the third time Hellerstein has blocked Trump's removal efforts. Trump first tried to move the case before trial. After Bragg's office secured the conviction on all 34 felony counts, Trump tried again. And after the Supreme Court's immunity ruling gave his attorneys new ammunition, he tried a third time.
The conviction itself carries an unusual sentence. Judge Juan Merchan sentenced Trump to an unconditional discharge on January 10, 2025, no jail time, no fine, no probation. But the felony conviction remains permanently on his record, making him the first sitting or former president ever convicted of a crime, as the New York Post noted.
That distinction matters. An unconditional discharge means the sentence itself imposes no practical burden. The conviction, however, is a different matter, it stays on the books unless overturned on appeal, and Trump's team has now lost three rounds in federal court trying to make that happen.
The case is not the only legal front where courts have declined to give Trump relief. The Supreme Court also let the $5 million E. Jean Carroll verdict stand after declining Trump's appeal, underscoring the difficulty of reversing civil and criminal judgments once juries have spoken.
Trump's team is not without reason to believe the 2nd Circuit may be more receptive. In November, a three-judge panel ruled that Hellerstein had bypassed "important issues relevant" to Trump's removal request and ordered him to reconsider. Fox News reported at the time that Trump's legal team hailed the decision as a significant victory.
But Hellerstein reconsidered and came back with the same answer. His Friday ruling addressed the issues the appeals court flagged and still found Trump's arguments fell short, both on the merits and on timeliness. The judge concluded that Trump had not demonstrated the "good cause and diligence" required to justify another bite at the apple.
Federal law allows officials prosecuted for acts performed "under color" of their office to move their cases to federal court. Congress designed the provision to prevent states from interfering with federal duties and to ensure a neutral forum. Trump's argument was that the hush money payment and the business records that concealed it were connected to his role as a federal officeholder.
Hellerstein's ruling says otherwise. The judge drew a clear line between personal conduct and presidential duties, treating the payment to Daniels and the subsequent bookkeeping as private acts that fell outside the scope of official authority.
A spokesperson for the president's legal team responded to the ruling with a statement casting the prosecution as politically motivated:
"The Supreme Court's historic decision on Immunity, the Federal and New York State Constitutions, and other established legal precedent mandate that the Witch Hunt perpetrated by the Manhattan DA be removed to federal court, and immediately overturned and dismissed."
The spokesperson added that Trump "has already prevailed in this case at the Second Circuit Court of Appeals", a reference to the November ruling that sent the case back to Hellerstein, and called Friday's decision a contradiction of that earlier order.
Meanwhile, the case's key witness has undergone a remarkable transformation. Michael Cohen, the former Trump attorney who made the $130,000 payment and later became prosecutors' star witness, has recently said he was coerced into testifying. Cohen has since reconciled with Trump, blaming the "far left" for driving them apart, a reversal that could complicate any future proceedings if the case is ever retried or revisited.
Trump faced four criminal prosecutions as he campaigned for another White House term. The New York case was the only one to reach trial. The other three were dismissed. That track record raises a fair question about whether the Manhattan prosecution was the strongest case or simply the most politically determined one.
Trump is also challenging the conviction through the New York state appellate process, which remains pending. That parallel track could ultimately prove more consequential than the federal removal strategy, which has now failed three times before the same judge.
Hellerstein, appointed to the federal bench by former President Clinton, has handled the removal question from the beginning. Trump's team has not raised a formal recusal challenge, but the judge's appointment by a Democratic president and his repeated rulings against Trump have drawn scrutiny from conservative legal commentators who question whether the forum itself is fair.
The broader political landscape around Trump continues to create legal and personal crosscurrents. Jared Kushner has been meeting with Hamas leaders in Egypt as part of the administration's Gaza disarmament push, while allies like Stephen Miller have worked to strengthen bonds with key Senate allies, all while the president's legal team fights on multiple fronts.
Trump's immediate appeal to the 2nd Circuit sets up another round of briefing and oral argument. The appeals court already showed willingness to push back on Hellerstein once, ordering the reconsideration that produced Friday's ruling. Whether the panel finds that Hellerstein adequately addressed its concerns this time, or sends the case back again, will determine whether Trump's federal strategy has any life left.
If the 2nd Circuit upholds Hellerstein, Trump could petition the Supreme Court to take the case. Given the high court's own immunity ruling, there is at least a theoretical path to review. But the justices would have to agree that paying hush money to conceal a personal matter qualifies as an official act, a claim that, so far, no court has accepted.
Newsmax reported that the conviction remains permanently on Trump's record following the unconditional discharge, reinforcing the stakes of each successive appeal. Win or lose in federal court, the state appellate process continues independently.
Three judges, three denials, and a conviction that still stands. If the system is going to correct this, it will have to do it somewhere other than Alvin Hellerstein's courtroom.
