AdvertiseDonate
Saturday, November 7, 2026Local news for Bucks County, Pennsylvania.
Bucks County Tribune · 196 West Ashland Street, Doylestown, PA 18901

Appeals Court Hears Challenge to Trump Hush Money Conviction

A five-judge panel in New York reviewed arguments Thursday seeking to overturn the 34-count felony verdict related to a $130,000 payment.

By Charles Reed ·

Illustration for: Appeals Court Hears Challenge to Trump Hush Money Conviction
Illustration generated for this article, not a news photograph.

Thirty-four felony counts formed the basis of a criminal conviction now under review by a New York appeals court. The verdict stems from a 2024 trial involving a $130,000 payment made to adult film performer Stormy Daniels. Trump's legal team argued Thursday that the conviction should be dismissed. The case involves allegations that business records were falsified to hide the payment. The defense presented these arguments to a panel of five appellate judges.

President Donald Trump did not attend the session. His attorneys focused on the legal theory used by Manhattan prosecutors. They claimed the theory relied too heavily on federal election laws. Robert Giuffra Jr., one of Trump's lawyers, told the judges that state prosecutors should not tie a case to the Federal Election Campaign Act. He described this argument as the most obvious ground for reversal.

The Manhattan District Attorney's office maintains that the payment was designed to keep unflattering information from voters before the 2016 election. Prosecutors stated that this amount to an illegal campaign contribution. They argued that the federal law served as a fact to prove a conspiracy. This conspiracy allegedly led to the creation of false business records. They are not prosecuting a federal campaign finance offense directly.

Justice Troy Webber asked Manhattan Assistant District Attorney Steven Wu if the prosecution relied on the Federal Election Campaign Act to prove the falsifying business records charge. Wu replied that the reliance was only partial. He stated that the act was important to show the purpose of the falsification. That purpose, he said, was to conceal the alleged conspiracy.

The appeal also addresses evidence presented to jurors about Trump's first term. Defense lawyers cited presidential immunity for official acts. They argued that responding to the Daniels story in 2018 constituted official conduct. Giuffra wrote in a filing this October that a president addressing the nation to defend himself is carrying out constitutional duties. He said this conduct is protected by immunity.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's office counters that the legal theory and jury instructions were legitimate. Prosecutors described the White House related evidence as fair game. They noted that some evidence was public record or a general description of office practices. Wu wrote in a July filing that discussions about purely private matters do not constitute official acts. He added that there was a mountain of other evidence against Trump.

The political context of the case is evident in the court filings. One filing by the Trump team claimed the case resulted from immense political pressure on a Democratic prosecutor. This rhetoric mirrors claims Trump has made in the public sphere. The May 2024 verdict made Trump the first sitting president with a criminal conviction. The conviction has not impeded his return to the White House or resulted in punishment so far.

The original trial centered on $130,000 paid by Michael Cohen, Trump's former lawyer. Cohen received the money weeks before the 2016 election to buy Daniels' silence about an alleged encounter. Trump says nothing sexual happened between them. His company reimbursed Cohen in 2017, logging the payments as legal expenses. Prosecutors argue he orchestrated a conspiracy that violated federal campaign finance laws.

Trump's lawyers contend there is weak evidence that he knew about Cohen's dealings at the time. They argue the payments were legitimate legal expenses. They say the money was used to avoid embarrassing his family rather than as hidden campaign spending. This distinction matters because New York law requires intent to commit or conceal a separate crime for the records falsification to be a felony.

Trump is also pursuing a federal court challenge to shift the case on immunity grounds. A federal judge denied that request for the third time in August. Trump's attorneys are appealing that decision. Arguments for that federal appeal are scheduled for November 16.

More News · Philadelphia news · Report a business · Got a Story?

Get Bucks County Tribune in your inboxLocal news for Bucks County, Pennsylvania. Free, a few times a week, unsubscribe any time.

Get Bucks County Tribune in your inboxLocal news for Bucks County, Pennsylvania. Free, a few times a week, unsubscribe any time.