Judge rejects Trump bid to move hush money conviction to federal court

Newyork,UPDATED: Aug 29, 2026 00:00 IST

A federal judge has again rejected Donald Trump’s attempt to wipe out his hush money conviction, ruling that the case should not be moved from a New York state court to a federal court on presidential immunity grounds. Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein said the reasons cited by Trump for renewing the request were "neither new nor legally sufficient".

It is the third time Hellerstein has refused to let the US District Court in Manhattan take over the case in which Trump was tried and convicted. Trump is expected to appeal. A spokesperson for his legal team called the ruling "baseless and lawless", while Trump is also separately challenging the conviction through the state appellate process.

In his ruling on Friday, Hellerstein said Trump "has failed to show good cause and diligence". He also said Trump was seeking a "second bite at the apple", adding that this was "a result the law disfavors". The judge said Trump’s delay in seeking removal to federal court was "a quintessential strategic decision" and that later viewing it as a poor one was not enough "to establish cause".

In a statement issued on behalf of Trump’s legal team, a spokesperson said: "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 statement added: "President Trump will be filing a powerful appeal, and will continue defeating Democrat weaponization at every turn." State prosecutors did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Trump was convicted in May 2024 on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to conceal a USD 130,000 hush money payment to adult film actor Stormy Daniels. Daniels’ claim of a sexual encounter with Trump a decade earlier had threatened to disrupt his 2016 presidential campaign. Trump has long denied Daniels’ claim and has said he did nothing wrong. He was later given an unconditional discharge, which left the conviction in place but imposed no punishment.

The guilty verdict, delivered while Trump was between terms, made him the first former and now current US president to be convicted of a crime. Hellerstein had earlier rejected Trump’s efforts to move the case after the March 2023 indictment and again after the trial, when Trump’s lawyers argued that the conviction should be thrown out after the Supreme Court’s July 2024 ruling that presidents and former presidents cannot be prosecuted for official acts and that official acts cannot be used as evidence that unofficial actions were illegal.

Last November, the 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals directed Hellerstein to reconsider his post-trial ruling, saying he had not addressed "important issues relevant" to Trump’s request. A three-judge panel said it was expressing no view on the outcome, but asked him to closely review evidence that Trump said was tied to official acts, whether he could argue those actions were part of his White House duties, whether he had "diligently sought" removal, and whether the case could be moved to federal court at all after conviction and sentencing in state court.

During oral arguments in February, Hellerstein questioned the Trump legal team’s strategy after the Supreme Court ruling. Instead of immediately seeking removal to federal court, Trump’s lawyers first asked the state trial judge, Juan Merchan, to set aside the verdict on immunity grounds. Hellerstein said that was a "strategic decision" and suggested that by going to the state court first, Trump’s lawyers had cost him the chance to pursue relief in federal court.

Trump lawyer Jeffrey Wall argued that prosecutors had rushed the case to trial instead of waiting for the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling, and said the defence was under time pressure because sentencing was then set for just 10 days after that ruling. But the judge noted that Trump’s lawyers did not ask him to intervene until nearly two months later, while their request before Merchan was still pending. When Hellerstein said the legal team had sought "two bites at the apple", Wall replied, "No, your honour. It is what any sensible litigant would do". Hellerstein answered, "Not so," and added, "That is a decision on your part. You didn’t have to do that. You could have come right to the federal court. Just by filing a notice of removal, there would be no sentencing."

With Friday’s ruling, Hellerstein has again left Trump’s hush money conviction in the New York state court system, while Trump continues to challenge it both in state appeals and through a fresh federal appeal.

With PTI Inputs

- Ends