A federal judge on Tuesday rejected former President Donald Trump’s second and final attempt to move his New York bribery case to federal court.
U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein of the Southern District of New York found there was no good reason to grant Trump’s lawyers permission to file a motion.
The judge’s order states that in asserting “good cause” to move the case, Trump primarily argued that the state judge presiding over the criminal case, Juan Merchan, was biased against him and that the U.S. Supreme Court’s July immunity ruling presented a valid federal defense to the hush-money case.
Hellerstein rejected both arguments, holding first that the alleged bias of a state court judge did not present a federal question that would justify the jurisdiction of a federal court, and was a question for a state court of appeals to decide.
Trump’s lawyers have also argued that the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity in another criminal case against him should lead to the charges being dropped because prosecutors used some evidence of Trump’s “official acts” as part of their case.
Hellerstein said he stood by his July 2023 conclusion — after a briefing and evidentiary hearing — that dismissal of the case was not warranted because the case focused on Trump’s personal actions.
“I held in my July 19, 2023, order and opinion that ‘money paid to silence an adult film star is unrelated to the official acts of a president,’” Hellerstein wrote. “Nothing in the Supreme Court’s opinion affects my previous conclusion that the silencing payments were private, unofficial acts outside the bounds of executive authority.”
The judge’s decision comes after New York prosecutors urged Merchan not to allow Trump’s last-minute effort to move the case to federal court to prevent him from ruling on pending motions in the landmark state criminal case.
Trump had asked Merchan to overturn the jury’s verdict because it relied on evidence of Trump’s “official” conduct, and thus his immunity, but he also asked Merchan to delay sentencing until after the November election. Both motions are still pending.
“Federal law clearly provides that proceedings before this Court should not be stayed pending the district court’s determination of the defendant’s motion to dismiss,” the prosecutor said in his letter. He also added that “the defendant’s concerns about the timing are the result of his own strategic and delaying litigation tactics: this second motion to dismiss comes nearly ten months after the defendant voluntarily abandoned his appeal of his first unsuccessful attempt to dismiss this case; three months after he was convicted by a jury on thirty-four counts; and nearly two months after the defendant asked this Court to consider his motion under CPL § 330.30 for a new trial.”
The prosecutor’s office opposes Trump’s efforts to overturn the verdict and argues that the impact of the “official acts” cited in the case was negligible.
Merchan is expected to rule on the matter on September 16, two days before Trump is sentenced.
Prosecutors also said they would defer to the judge to push back the September 18 date to give Trump “ample time” to appeal, but also urged him to impose the sentence “without unreasonable delay.”
nbcnews
