A federal judge in New York expressed doubts Wednesday about President Donald Trump’s latest effort to overturn or sidestep his New York hush-money conviction by moving the case into federal court, according to the Associated Press (AP).
During a hearing ordered by an appeals court, U.S. District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein pressed Trump attorney Jeffrey Wall on why the defense waited to seek federal relief after first fighting presidential immunity issues in state court. Hellerstein suggested the strategy looked like an attempt to get “two bites at the apple,” and said he would issue a ruling later.
The hearing comes as Trump continues to argue that presidential immunity should protect certain aspects of the case—and as courts weigh how the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity decision could affect what evidence is allowed when alleged official acts overlap with private conduct.
Why It Matters
The proceeding tested whether Trump’s hush-money conviction—already returned by a jury—could be reopened, moved to federal court, or otherwise affected by immunity arguments tied to alleged official acts. The outcome could shape how far criminal exposure extends for presidents and former presidents, and how evidence from time in office can be used in prosecutions involving private conduct.
What To Know
At Wednesday’s hearing in Manhattan federal court, Hellerstein questioned the defense timeline: after the Supreme Court’s July 1, 2024, immunity ruling, Trump’s team litigated immunity in state court and only later sought federal intervention. Hellerstein indicated the delay could undercut the request and hinted the bid might be moot given how much time has passed since the verdict, AP reported.
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals instructed Hellerstein in November to take another look at whether evidence introduced at the state trial involved official acts—and if so, whether that affects whether the case belongs in federal court. The appeals panel did not indicate what conclusion he should reach.
Hellerstein has previously denied Trump’s attempts to shift the case to federal court, including a September 2025 ruling and an earlier decision following the March 2023 indictment. In those decisions, he concluded the conduct at the heart of the prosecution was personal rather than official.
A separate federal judge also refused to step in during 2024 when Trump sought federal involvement in post-trial proceedings, AP reported.
Trump was convicted by a New York jury in May 2024 on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records tied to a $130,000 payment to Stormy Daniels. Prosecutors argued the payment was intended to influence the 2016 election by suppressing her allegation of a sexual encounter. Trump has denied wrongdoing and has also denied the alleged encounter.
Judge Juan M. Merchan later imposed an unconditional discharge—meaning the conviction stands but no punishment was imposed. Trump’s appeal in state court remains pending, AP reported.
What People Are Saying
Hellerstein, in federal court Wednesday, per AP: “You didn’t have to do that. You could have come right to the federal court … You made a choice, and you sought two bites at the apple.”
Steven Cheung, Trump communications director, in a statement Monday, responding to a state court ruling citing the Supreme Court’s immunity decision, per AP: “This lawless case should have never been brought, and the Constitution demands that it be immediately dismissed.”
What Happens Next
Hellerstein said he will rule after reviewing the arguments on whether trial evidence tied to alleged official acts changes the analysis for federal removal or other relief. Any decision could be appealed, while Trump’s state appeal of the conviction continues separately.
