U.S. Appeals Court orders a new review of President Trump’s hush money conviction, citing unresolved questions from the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling.
U.S. federal appeals court has revived President Donald Trump’s attempt to challenge his New York hush money conviction, directing a lower court to reassess how the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling on presidential immunity might affect the case.
In a decision released Thursday November 6, 2025, a three-judge panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Trump should have another opportunity to argue that his conviction may conflict with the Supreme Court’s 2024 decision granting sitting presidents immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts.
The panel sent the case back to District Judge Alvin Hellerstein, instructing him to consider whether Trump met the legal threshold for removal to federal court. The judges emphasized that they were not taking a position on how the lower court should ultimately rule.
“We express no view and neither rule nor imply that the District Court should resolve Trump’s motion in any particular way,” the opinion stated.
The move gives Trump another chance to shift his case from New York State court into the federal system — a step his team has long sought, claiming bias in state proceedings. The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office, led by Alvin Bragg, has opposed any federal intervention, arguing that Trump’s conviction and sentencing have already been completed.
Read Also: United States Administration Revokes 80,000 Non-Immigrant Visas
Trump was found guilty earlier this year on 34 counts of falsifying business records tied to payments made to adult-film actress Stormy Daniels ahead of the 2016 election. Prosecutors said Trump misrepresented reimbursements to his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, who facilitated the payment to silence Daniels. Trump has denied any affair.
Central to Trump’s latest argument is whether the use of testimony from former White House aides — including Hope Hicks and Madeleine Westerhout — violated the Supreme Court’s immunity standard by introducing material related to his official duties. Prosecutors contend those witnesses spoke about Trump’s personal conduct, not his actions as president.
Judge Hellerstein previously ruled the hush money reimbursements were “private, unofficial acts” unrelated to presidential duties, but the appeals court said the Supreme Court’s ruling required a deeper review.
Trump’s legal spokesman hailed Thursday’s decision as a “major step” toward overturning what he called a politically motivated prosecution. The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office declined to comment.
The district court will now determine whether Trump’s immunity claim warrants further hearings or additional legal filings before a new decision is made.