A federal judge on Tuesday denied former President Donald Trump’s second and final bid to move his New York hush money case to federal court.
U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein of the Southern District of New York ruled that there was no good reason to allow Trump’s lawyers to even file a lawsuit.
The judge’s order said that in asserting “good cause” to move the case, Trump argued primarily that state Judge Juan Merchan, who is presiding over the criminal case, is biased against him and that the immunity ruling handed down by the U.S. Supreme Court in July is a valid federal sentence. defense in case of hush money.
Hellerstein rejected both arguments, stating first that the alleged impartiality of the state court judge did not present a federal question justifying jurisdiction in federal court and was a matter for a state court of appeals.
Trump’s lawyers also argued that the US Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity in a separate criminal case against Trump should lead to him being dismissed because prosecutors used evidence of Trump’s “official acts” as part of their case.
Hellerstein said he stood by his July 2023 conclusion — after a briefing and hearing evidence — that the case was not warranted because the case focused on Trump’s personal actions.
“In my July 19, 2023 order and opinion, I held that “the hush money paid to an adult film star is not related to the President’s official activities,” Hellerstein wrote. “Nothing in the Supreme Court’s view affects my previous conclusion that the hush money was a private, unofficial activity that are not within the limits of executive power.”
The judge’s ruling came after New York prosecutors urged Merchan not to allow Trump’s eleventh-hour efforts to move the case to federal court to prevent him from ruling on pending motions in the historic state criminal case.
Trump had asked Merchan to overturn the jury’s verdict because it allegedly relied on evidence that Trump was “official” and therefore immune, but has also asked that Merchan postpone his ruling until after the November election. Both shows are still pending.
“Under federal law, there is no need to stay the trial until the district court rules on the defendant’s notice of removal,” the DA’s letter stated. It also added that “defendant’s concerns about the timing stem from his own strategic and delaying litigation tactics: This second removal notice comes nearly ten months after defendant voluntarily dropped his appeal of his first failed attempt to remove this case; three months after the jury found found him guilty of 34 felonies, and nearly two months after the defendant asked the court to consider his CPL § 330.30 new trial.”
The DA’s office opposes Trump’s efforts to overturn the conviction, arguing that the “official actions” cited in the case had negligible effect.
Merchan is expected to rule on the case on September 16 – two days before Trump’s sentencing.
Prosecutors have also said they would delay asking the judge to reschedule the Sept. 18 date to give Trump “ample time” to appeal, but also urged him to issue a sentence “without undue delay.”
This article was originally published on NBCNews.com
