President Donald Trump speaks outside the Oval Office of the White House, Monday, April 13, 2026, in Washington (AP Photo/Alex Brandon).
President Donald Trump has failed to convince a Manhattan-based federal judge that his years-old New York City-based criminal case should be transferred to federal court.
"The grounds for a second removal cited by Defendant, Donald J. Trump, are neither new nor legally sufficient," a 35-page order issued Friday reads. "He has failed to show good cause and diligence. His motion for leave to file a second notice of removal is denied."
Before and since he was found guilty of 34 felonies, Trump has lost the fight to have his local case removed to federal court.
The case before U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein, a Bill Clinton appointee, began in May 2023, with a removal notice.
After fast and fierce motions practice, the court ruled against Trump in July 2023 and sent the case back to the New York Supreme Court in New York County, the formal name for the trial court in Manhattan.
Appeals went nowhere. In May 2024, the 45th president was convicted. In late August 2024, he filed a second removal notice. Roughly two months later, Trump beat Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential election and later assumed office as the 47th president.
The prospect of Trump's sentencing hung in the air while the removal attempt continued, only to be decided in the then-president-elect's favor in the form of an "unconditional discharge" issued by New York Supreme Court Judge Juan Merchan. Trump's hush-money case over funds paid to Stormy Daniels ahead of the 2020 election ended without any adverse legal consequences for the defendant, but with his conviction for falsifying business records still on the books.
Between the election and sentencing decision, the district court denied the removal notice again — and denied a motion to stay the ruling. The case then went up the appellate ladder and came before the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in June 2025.
In November 2025, the appellate court sent the case back to the district court to reconsider the president's motion in light of the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark opinion on presidential immunity.
Now, Hellerstein has considered months' worth of motions and hearings — and is still resolutely not convinced.
"President Trump must show that 'he acted diligently and without undue delay to remove the case based on' new grounds, here, principally the issuance of the United States Supreme Court's decision in Trump v. United States, in order to 'show good cause for the untimely filing at issue,'" the court's order reads. "He fails to do so."
The judge recites the timelines of the various cases, noting that Trump "made a strategic decision" to use presidential immunity claims as a defense in his criminal trial instead of as a removal basis during the trial. Then, Trump used immunity claims as a basis to dismiss after the trial — again not as a basis for removal.
"Finally, 64 days later, and when it became apparent that the New York court likely intended to deny his motion to dismiss and sentence him two days after, Trump filed his motion in federal court," the judge explains.
But by then it was too late for such a removal claim, the judge found.
"A party seeking to remove must do so promptly no later than 30 days after arraignment or any time before trial, whichever is earlier," the order continues. "If he misses this window, he can seek leave to remove despite his lateness by showing 'good cause.' But he cannot play one court against another; he cannot seek victory in one court, and then, when it becomes apparent that the court will rule against him, seek to remove his case to another court."
Hellerstein cites precedent to note that the removal statute does not mean "a party may experiment" in state court and then "transfer it to the federal court" if the experiment fails.
But that is admittedly what Trump and his legal team did here.
"At oral argument before the Court of Appeals, Trump's counsel acknowledged 'he could have sought removal immediately following the Supreme Court's decision,'" the order goes on. "He instead elected to litigate immunity in state court."
The judge notes "Trump himself recognizes" the second removal bid only came after it was clear immunity would fail in Empire State court.
"Trump seeks a 'second bite at the apple,' a result the law disfavors," Hellerstein continues. "Trump's delay in filing for removal constitutes a 'quintessential strategic decision,' and the 'fact that he later came to view that decision as a poor one is not sufficient."
The judge also said the lengthy gulf before filing was "inconsistent with good cause" in and of itself.
"The U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision July 1, 2024," Hellerstein went on. "It took 64 more days for Trump to move in this court for leave to remove on September 3, 2024. I hold that President Trump failed to show good cause."