A federal judge in Manhattan has again declined President Donald Trump’s efforts to transfer, or “remove,” the Manhattan district attorney’s criminal case against him to federal court in an effort to erase his 2024 conviction in the so-called hush money case.

In considering whether Trump had shown the requisite “good cause” for delaying his second attempt to remove the case to federal court, Judge Alvin Hellerstein, a 92-year-old judge in the Southern District of New York, noted that even after the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity decision, Trump first tried to litigate that issue in New York state court.

That, according to Hellerstein, is antithetical to good cause: A litigant “cannot seek victory in one court, and then, when it becomes apparent that the court will rule against him, seek to remove his case to another court,” he wrote.

Hellerstein also found that none of the evidence Trump pointed to as evidence of his official acts is, in fact, presidential or official conduct that should have been excluded from the trial on account of the Supreme Court’s ruling.

“[P]aying hush money to an adult film star or engaging in a cover-up of an embarrassment are not subsumed in presidential immunity,” Hellerstein wrote.

The decision marks the third time Hellerstein has ruled on Trump’s efforts to move the district attorney’s case to federal court.

In response to the ruling, a spokesperson for Trump’s legal team issued a statement that read in part, “President Trump has already prevailed in this case at the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, and today’s baseless and lawless decision contradicts that correct ruling. President Trump will be filing a powerful appeal, and will continue defeating Democrat weaponization at every turn.”

Trump first sought to remove Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s case against him in spring 2023, shortly after Bragg unveiled his indictment of Trump. By July of that year, Hellerstein ruled the case should remain in state court, on the grounds that it was unrelated to any of Trump’s actions as president and that neither of his intended federal defenses — presidential immunity and preemption of the relevant state law — were plausible.

Although Trump initially indicated he would challenge that ruling, he withdrew his appeal months later in November 2023.

Yet nearly a year later, following his May 2024 trial, at which he was convicted on all 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree, Trump again sought to move his case to federal court. He argued that the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity decision, issued weeks after the trial’s conclusion, as well as the trial court’s alleged bias against him, constituted “good cause” for a renewed push to remove the case.

Within days, Hellerstein denied Trump’s motion in a four-page order. Trump appealed, and in November 2025, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit vacated Hellerstein’s decision, instructing him to examine more closely the effect of the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity decision on removal and to consider whether a removal motion can be raised during or after a trial if new grounds arise. 

Hellerstein’s newest order comes as Trump simultaneously appeals his conviction in New York state courts. While Judge Juan Merchan, who oversaw the trial, ruled in January 2025 that Trump would receive an “unconditional discharge” — meaning no jail time, fines or probation in connection with his conviction — he left Trump’s conviction in place. Trump’s final brief in that appeal is not due until mid-October. It likely will be months before the appeals court, known as the First Department, renders its decision.

However, even as he pursues his state court appeal, Trump apparently would prefer to move the case to federal court. In particular, Trump’s submissions before Hellerstein reflect the belief that a federal court would be more receptive to his argument that under the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity decision, the Manhattan DA’s office improperly introduced evidence of his official acts as president, so his conviction therefore must be vacated. Trump has also suggested that a federal court could be persuaded that Merchan should have been recused from the case because of alleged conflicts of interest and the appearance of impropriety.

CORRECTION (August 28, 2026, 2:35 p.m. ET): A previous version of this article misstated when Trump’s brief in the appeal of his conviction is due. It is due in mid-October, not mid-September.

The post Judge again refuses Trump’s bid to move his criminal case to federal court appeared first on MS NOW.

Author: Source Author

From MS Now.