Trump’s legal team has submitted a filing to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, urging them to reconsider a previous decision made by a lower court. In September, the lower court had denied Trump’s request to transfer the state case to federal court.
The defense lawyers contended in the filing that the jury in the case had been exposed to evidence of President Trump’s official acts, which, according to the Supreme Court’s July ruling on presidential immunity, should have been protected.
According to the 99-page filing, attorneys Todd Blanche and Emil Bove highlight the intricate first-time concerns surrounding the Supremacy Clause, federal-officer removal, appearances of impropriety, and conflicts associated with an unprecedented and unfounded prosecution of the front-runner in the 2024 Presidential race.
They also emphasize the importance of safeguarding the future Presidents’ ability to serve the American people without apprehension of retaliation from unfriendly local officials.
Criminal or civil cases involving federal officials can be transferred to federal court if they can demonstrate that the case is focused on their official conduct. In 2023, when Trump attempted to move his hush money case to federal court by asserting that the accusations were related to his actions as president, U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein rejected the request, stating that “paying hush money to an adult film star is not associated with a President’s official actions.”
Judge Hellerstein rejected Trump’s plea to revisit his September decision, where the former president had requested a postponement of his sentencing. The judge ruled that Trump did not provide sufficient justification for re-examining the matter.
Judge Hellerstein, in response to the Supreme Court’s opinion, maintains his previous conclusion that the hush money payments were private, unofficial acts, beyond the scope of executive authority.
Donald Trump’s sentencing has been postponed until November 26th, as per the decision of Judge Juan Merchan, who is presiding over the case in New York. Trump had requested the delay to ensure that the sentencing takes place after the November election.
In their filing on Monday, Trump’s lawyers also expressed concerns about Judge Merchan’s alleged conflict of interest and the potential political motivations of the prosecutors. They argued that the witnesses had fabricated a false and implausible story that aligned with the desires of President Trump’s political opponents.
If the attempt to transfer the case to federal court succeeds, it could grant Trump the power to dismiss the prosecution if he is elected as president in November. In contrast to his federal criminal cases, Trump lacks the ability to directly control the prosecution or grant himself a pardon if the case remains in state court.
If the motion to remove Trump remains unresolved by November 26, it could potentially affect the timing of his sentencing.
Judge Merchan is expected to issue a ruling on Trump’s attempt to dismiss the conviction on the grounds of presidential immunity by November 12th.