US Justice Department Argues Trump's Hush Money Conviction Should Be Overturned Based on Presidential Immunity

The US Department of Justice has formally stated that President Donald Trump's hush money criminal conviction in New York should be overturned due to the use of improper evidence and legal reasoning that conflicts with federal law.

In a filing submitted Friday to a Manhattan state appeals court, the Justice Department aligned with Trump's position that presidential immunity should protect his official acts while in office, arguing that presenting evidence of such presidential actions during trial "can never be harmless."

The Department further contended that federal law prohibits jurors from evaluating whether Trump violated federal election regulations by concealing a payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels—a disclosure that could have potentially disrupted his 2016 presidential campaign.

These arguments were presented in an amicus brief supporting Trump's appeal to overturn his May 2024 conviction on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records. While courts are not obligated to consider such briefs in their rulings, the filing represents significant federal support for Trump's legal position.

When contacted, a representative for Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, whose office secured the conviction, declined to comment on the Justice Department's filing.

Both Trump and the Justice Department referenced the Supreme Court's landmark July 2024 decision that established protections for presidents from prosecution regarding official acts and restricted prosecutors from discussing such official conduct in criminal cases focused on private behavior.

The Justice Department specifically argued that trial judge Juan Merchan should not have permitted jurors to hear testimony about Trump's alleged conversations with Attorney General Jeff Sessions regarding a potential federal election investigation, or discussions with White House Communications Director Hope Hicks about managing negative press coverage.

"To allow any of the Nation's more than 2,300 prosecutors' offices to indict a former President for his official conduct would risk chilling every President in the vigorous discharge of the duties of his office," the Justice Department stated in its filing.

The Department acknowledged that Trump's six-week trial occurred before the Supreme Court issued its decision, meaning Judge Merchan could not have applied its findings during the proceedings.

On Thursday, a federal appeals court directed a Manhattan district judge to reconsider Trump's request to transfer his conviction from state court to federal court. Such a transfer could potentially expedite Trump's exoneration, as the state appeals process might otherwise extend for approximately two years.

Judge Merchan sentenced Trump on January 10 to an unconditional discharge—an unusual sentence that the judge explained was intended to minimize disruption and ensure "finality" as Trump prepared to begin his second presidential term just ten days later.