http://redstate.com/smoosieq/2025/11/06/whoa-2nd-circuit-issues-stunning-decision-on-trumps-ny-criminal-case-n2195921
By Susie Moore
RedState
November 6, 2025
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals issued a stunning decision on Thursday, vacating a lower court's ruling that denied President Donald Trump's efforts to remove the New York criminal case against him from state court to federal court.
Buckle up because I'm about to run through the procedural history here: As we all know, Trump was convicted of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in New York state court in May of 2024. This was the case brought by Manhattan D.A. Alvin Bragg, alleging that Trump orchestrated an illegal scheme to influence the 2016 presidential election by directing his personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, to pay $130,000 to Stormy Daniels, an adult film star, to prevent her from publicly revealing a sexual encounter with Trump. Judge Juan Merchan presided over that trial, and when all was said and done, Trump was convicted on all 34 counts.
But a funny thing happened on the way to the presidency...The Supreme Court issued a ruling on presidential immunity that had far-reaching implications.
Trump had initially attempted to remove the case from state court to federal court, which effort was shot down. But after the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Trump v. United States in July of 2024, Trump renewed his efforts to remove the case to federal court, asserting that the Supreme Court’s intervening decision rendered the State of New York's prosecution one “relating to” his official acts as president, such that the case was now removable and established "good cause" for his untimely filing.
U.S. District Court Judge Alvin Hellerstein shot down that renewed effort in September 2024, and Trump again appealed to the 2nd Circuit, which heard oral argument on the matter in June of 2025. On Thursday, they issued their ruling, determining that the district court failed to properly consider the renewed motion.
The District Court denied leave, concluding, among other things, that “good cause” had not been shown 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. Those issues include but are not limited to the impact of Trump v. United States on the removability of the underlying state prosecution. For example, the District Court did not consider whether certain evidence admitted during the state court trial relates to immunized official acts or, if so, whether evidentiary immunity transformed the State’s case into one that relates to acts under color of the Presidency. Nor did the District Court consider whether any notice of removal of a criminal prosecution under § 1455(b)(1) must be filed before trial even if new grounds for removal arise during or after trial. We therefore VACATE the District Court’s order denying Trump’s motion for leave to file a second notice of removal and REMAND for reconsideration of the motion consistent with this opinion.
What does that mean? It means the district court has to revisit the issue and consider that the case should have been removed to federal court — meaning it was improperly tried in state court — which could mean that the convictions ultimately don't stand. (That's not guaranteed, but it could very well be the outcome of this.)
Stay tuned!
The essential American soul is hard, isolate, stoic, and a killer. It has never yet melted. ~ D.H. Lawrence
| 
