Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What is the current status of Donald Trump’s felony appeals as of November 2025?
Executive summary
As of early November 2025, Donald Trump has active, parallel appellate efforts aimed at erasing or relocating his 2024 New York hush‑money felony conviction: [1] a formal appeal in New York’s Appellate Division seeking reversal of the 34 felony convictions, filed in late October 2025 [2] [3], and [4] a federal removal strategy revived by a Second Circuit panel that sent the question back to a district judge to reconsider whether the case should be moved to federal court in light of the Supreme Court’s presidential‑immunity ruling [5] [6] [7]. The appeals process is actively unfolding and could route issues back and forth between state and federal courts, and potentially to the U.S. Supreme Court [8] [9].
1. Two tracks, one goal: state appeal and federal removal fight
Trump’s lawyers have pursued a conventional state‑court appeal asking New York’s Appellate Division to overturn the 34 felony falsifying‑business‑records convictions, filing a detailed brief in late October 2025 that calls the trial “fatally marred” and seeks vacation of the verdict [2] [3]. Concurrently, his team has pushed a removal strategy — arguing that after the Supreme Court’s 2024 presidential‑immunity ruling, federal courts must assess whether evidence at the trial was protected and thus whether the case belongs in federal court — and that effort was given new life when a Second Circuit panel sent the removal question back to the district judge for further consideration [5] [6] [7].
2. What the appeals court actually did — a procedural revival, not a final ruling
The Second Circuit did not reverse the conviction; it remanded, saying the district judge did not adequately consider whether trial evidence “relates to acts taken under color of the Presidency” and whether Trump had timely and diligently pursued removal — legal touchstones the appeals panel said needed fuller analysis [6] [10] [11]. Multiple outlets emphasize that the panel “express[ed] no view” on the ultimate merits and made clear this is a procedural directive to reconsider, not an endorsement that the conviction must be thrown out [7] [12].
3. The immunity argument at issue: evidence vs. guilt
Trump’s team does not claim blanket immunity from the 34 counts; rather they contend that key evidence admitted at trial — including testimony from former White House aides and social‑media posts — concerned presidential acts that the Supreme Court’s immunity decision shielded, transforming evidentiary questions into potential jurisdictional ones that could justify federal adjudication or vacatur [13] [10] [8]. Opponents, including prosecutors, have argued the underlying conduct predated Trump’s presidency and was personal in nature, meaning immunity should not apply [14].
4. Timing, stakes and possible paths forward
The state appellate appeal is underway and could itself take years through New York’s appellate levels; the removal remand to the district court creates an iterative path where the federal judge’s reconsideration could be appealed back up to the Second Circuit and possibly reach the Supreme Court, especially because the immunity doctrine remains subject to lower‑court interpretation after the high court’s 2024 ruling [9] [8]. Media accounts note that courts have already left “major issues to be worked out by lower courts,” underscoring that this phase is about legal procedure as much as substantive guilt [9] [5].
5. Divergent framings in coverage and the visible agendas
Conservative outlets highlighted the Second Circuit’s action as a “legal win” and a renewed path to erase the conviction [15] [7]; other outlets and legal reporters framed the remand as a narrow, procedural ruling that does not predict final outcomes and cautioned that success is far from certain [5] [12]. Trump’s filing language calling the prosecution “the most politically charged” underscores a political framing intended to persuade appellate judges and public opinion [3] [2]. Readers should note those competing agendas: appellate briefs aim to persuade judges, and press outlets emphasize different implications consistent with their editorial priorities [13] [12].
6. What reporting does not (yet) say
Available sources do not mention any final adjudication from the New York Appellate Division or a completed new district‑court ruling post‑remand as of the November reports; they also do not show a definitive Second Circuit or Supreme Court ruling that resolves whether the evidence at trial was immunized [5] [6] [2]. In short, the litigation remains active and procedural — significant rulings could still change the case’s course.
Bottom line: by November 2025, Trump has an open state‑court appeal challenging his conviction and a freshly revived federal removal avenue after the Second Circuit ordered a district judge to reexamine immunity‑related issues; neither path has produced a final outcome and both could send the dispute through further rounds of appellate review [2] [5] [6].