Judge blocks another Trump attempt to challenge hush money conviction

Judge blocks another Trump attempt to challenge hush funds conviction "Paying hush money to an adult film star or engaging in a cover-up of an embarrassment are not subsumed in presidential immunity, " the judge wrote.

Key points

• Court of Appeals directed Trump and his team to review how the Supreme Court's July 2024 decision could impact the state-level hush funds case.
• In September 2024, Hellerstein denied a similar motion seeking to move the case.
• At his January 2025 sentencing, days before he returned to office for his second term, Trump left without being sentenced to probation, jail time or penalties.
• The adult film actress has remarked she had a sexual encounter with the president and it could have impacted his 2016 campaign.
• More: In historic ruling on presidential immunity, Supreme Court notes Trump can be tried for private acts.

While a GOP-controlled Congress has not shown any solid interest in restraining the president's executive power, the courts may decide otherwise.

For context, a federal judge in New York denied President Donald Trump's renewed effort to move his hush funds case involving 34 felony convictions and adult film actress Stormy Daniels from a New York state court to federal court.

"He cannot play one court against another, " federal Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein wrote in his Aug. 28 order, saying Trump "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."

Trump's personal lawyer, Robert Giuffra Jr., promptly appealed the ruling. The White House referred a USA TODAY inquiry to Giuffra. Giuffra's firm did not immediately respond to USA TODAY's request for comment.

More: Trump gets new review of New York criminal hush funds case.

Meanwhile, the ruling means Trump's appeal will remain in the New York state court system and not move to federal court, where Trump hoped that the Supreme Court's presidential immunity argument could overturn the verdict. In September 2024, Hellerstein denied a similar motion seeking to move the case.

More: Trump loses bid to move hush funds case to federal court and avoid NY criminal sentencing.

Hellerstein, who was appointed to the federal bench by Bill Clinton, blocked Trump's motion, noting in his ruling that the president's arguments were "neither new nor legally sufficient."

For context, the president's legal team remarked evidence in the case, including testimony from his former lawyer Michael Cohen and Trump's own Twitter statements, was linked to his official role as president and, therefore, any criminal prosecution depending on it infringed on his presidential immunity, a matter the Supreme Court ruled on after the initial conviction. Hellerstein, in his ruling this week, disagreed with that take.

Notably, the judge called Trump's move a "second bite at the apple, " which the law "disfavors, " and called out the president's own admission in the court record that his second removal notice was filed "after the state court had all but rejected the immunity defense."

Hellerstein's ruling came after the 2nd U.S. Court of Appeals directed Trump and his team to review how the Supreme Court's July 2024 decision could impact the state-level hush funds case.

Notably, the president wants to overturn the May 2024 conviction on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records that discovered that he concealed a $130, 000 payment to Daniels. The adult film actress has remarked she had a sexual encounter with the president and it could have impacted his 2016 campaign. Trump continues to deny the allegations and has asked the New York state appeals court to void the conviction.

Then, in July 2024, the Supreme Court remarked in a different case that presidents are immune from prosecution tied to official acts and that evidence related to official acts cannot be employed in criminal cases. Trump's legal team notes that key evidence employed by jurors in their conviction came from official acts or personnel in the White House during his first term. The appeals court asked Hellerstein to review that disputed evidence.

At his January 2025 sentencing, days before he returned to office for his second term, Trump left without being sentenced to probation, jail time or penalties. Share your feedback to support improve our site!

For now, judge blocks another Trump attempt to challenge hush money conviction remains the part of the story worth watching, and further updates are likely as more details are confirmed.