Trump Secures Appeals Court Ruling in Stormy Daniels Case

A panel of the Second United States Appeals Court has issued a unanimous ruling that may bolster Donald Trump‘s attempts to have his felony convictions related to hush money payments dismissed in the high-profile “Stormy Daniels” case. This decision opens the door for Trump to argue that he is entitled to a presidential immunity defense in federal court.

The three-judge panel, composed entirely of Democratic appointees, instructed federal trial court judge Alvin Hellerstein to reassess whether he adequately considered the relevant issues necessary for meaningful appellate review. Judge Hellerstein, who previously ruled against Trump’s efforts to move the case from state to federal court, has faced scrutiny regarding his decisions. The appeals court’s ruling effectively represents a significant victory for Trump as he seeks to overturn the 34 felony convictions he received in connection with the payments made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels.

In its decision, the Second Circuit noted, “We leave it to the able and experienced District Judge to decide whether to solicit further briefing from the parties or hold a hearing to help it resolve these issues.” Importantly, the panel did not indicate a preferred outcome for Hellerstein’s review, stating it would “neither rule nor imply” how he should proceed.

After twice ruling that Trump’s case was not appropriate for federal court, Judge Hellerstein had previously argued that the payments made were “private unofficial acts” and were not connected to any federal duties. However, some payments cycled through attorney Michael Cohen were allegedly made from the Oval Office, raising questions about their nature. Trump had sought to move the case to a federal forum following the Supreme Court’s ruling in Trump v. United States, which established that official presidential acts are generally immune from prosecution.

Despite this, Judge Hellerstein maintained that “private schemes with private actors, unconnected to any statutory or constitutional authority or function of the executive, are considered unofficial acts.” The appellate court found Hellerstein’s reasoning incomplete, as it did not fully consider whether evidence presented during the state court trial pertained to immunized official acts.

One critical piece of evidence under consideration may come from former senior aide Hope Hicks. Trump’s legal team is also appealing the convictions in New York state court, where he continues to invoke presidential immunity. The state trial judge, Juan Merchan, has dismissed the relevance of that immunity, asserting that the case centers on private actions.

Trump has argued that Judge Merchan should have recused himself due to previous donations made to Democratic candidates, including Joe Biden, during the 2020 election cycle. Additionally, Merchan’s adult daughter works at a Democratic consulting firm that has ties to prominent figures opposed to Trump, such as Kamala Harris and Adam Schiff.

The legal strategy employed by Trump’s team also questions the jury instructions provided during the trial. The Manhattan jurors were informed that the falsification of business records, typically a misdemeanor in New York, could be elevated to a felony if they determined that Trump had contemplated a second crime. Trump’s legal representatives contend that this instruction violates the Supreme Court’s ruling in Ramos v. Louisiana, which mandates a unanimous jury verdict for criminal convictions.

Federal courts are often viewed as more favorable for defendants, particularly high-profile figures like Trump, who face trials in predominantly Democratic jurisdictions. The jury pool for the federal Southern District of New York encompasses a broader political demographic compared to just Manhattan. This context parallels efforts by other Trump associates, such as Mark Meadows, who have sought to transfer their cases to federal court for similar reasons.

As the situation develops, the implications of the appeals court’s ruling could significantly impact Trump’s ongoing legal battles and his political ambitions moving forward.