A federal judge on Aug. 28 denied President Donald Trump’s bid to transfer his New York falsified business records case to federal court.
“The grounds for a second removal cited by … Trump, are neither new nor legally sufficient. He has failed to show good cause and diligence,” U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein said in a written opinion.
A Manhattan jury found Trump guilty in May 2024 on 34 felony-level counts of falsifying business records in a case brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.
A New York state judge sentenced him in January 2025, imposing an unconditional discharge, meaning he was not given jail time, a fine, or probation.
Under federal law, cases filed in state court can be removed, or transferred, to a federal district court. A defendant files a notice of removal in federal court, which has the effect of transferring the case to federal court on a provisional basis. After the defendant notifies the state court, a hearing follows in federal court, and if removal is denied, the case is remanded back to state court.
In September 2024, Hellerstein denied Trump’s removal motion, finding that the U.S. Supreme Court’s July 2024 ruling that former presidents have broad criminal immunity for official acts did not alter his previous conclusion that payments to adult performer Stephanie Clifford “were private, unofficial acts, outside the bounds of executive authority.”
Hellerstein said in that ruling, “It would be highly improper for this Court to evaluate issues of unfairness or error in the state trial. Those are issues for the state appellate courts.”
After the Supreme Court’s decision, Trump appealed the ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which ruled in his favor in November 2025.
A three-judge panel held that it could not be “confident” that the district court ruled correctly when it found Trump had not shown good cause for “the delay in seeking removal a second time.”
“We cannot be confident that in doing so, the District Court adequately considered issues relevant to the good cause inquiry so as to enable meaningful appellate review.”
The panel directed the district court to reconsider its ruling with instructions to decide whether there was good cause, whether federal law allows federal removal after trial and judgment, and whether the case related to an official act, including whether trial evidence dealt with immunized official acts, and “if so, whether evidentiary immunity transformed the State’s case into one that relates to acts under color of the Presidency.”
In his new ruling, Hellerstein said that Trump was seeking a “‘second bite at the apple,’ a result the law disfavors.”
Trump also waited too long to file for removal, the judge said.
“Trump’s 64-day delay in finally moving in federal court for leave to remove is inconsistent with good cause. The U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision July 1, 2024. It took 64 more days for Trump to move in this court for leave to remove on September 3, 2024,” he said.
The judge added that the Supreme Court’s core holding on presidential immunity does not apply to Trump’s case.
Paying money to “an adult film star or engaging in a cover-up of an embarrassment are not subsumed in presidential immunity,” Hellerstein said.
Trump’s legal team criticized the new decision.
“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,” a spokesman told The Epoch Times.
“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’s attorneys filed a notice late on Aug. 28 advising the district court that their client is appealing the removal denial. The notice does not provide reasons for the appeal.
Sam Dorman contributed to this report.
We had a problem loading this article. Please enable javascript or use a different browser. If the issue persists, please visit our help center.