Which of Donald Trump's convictions were overturned on appeal and by which appellate courts?
Executive summary
Two post-2024 rulings have altered outcomes tied to Trump: a New York civil fraud judgment (reported as a $464 million penalty) was overturned by a New York appeals court [1], and Trump’s criminal "hush money" conviction in Manhattan — 34 counts tied to a $130,000 payment — has been given renewed life in federal appeals when a 2nd U.S. Circuit panel ordered a district judge to reconsider moving the case to federal court on immunity grounds; that order does not itself vacate the conviction [2] [3]. Available sources do not enumerate any other Trump criminal convictions actually overturned on appeal to date [4] [5].
1. What has actually been overturned: the civil money judgment
The clearest appellate reversal in the provided reporting concerns a New York state civil judgment — described in press statements as roughly $464 million — that a New York appeals court threw out, a development celebrated by Republican lawmakers [1]. That source is a partisan press release from Rep. Elise Stefanik’s office and frames the reversal as a vindication of President Trump; it documents the appeals court action overturning the monetary judgment but does not substitute independent analysis or the appellate opinion text [1]. Available sources do not provide the appeals court’s written opinion or the lower-court findings in full [1].
2. The Manhattan criminal conviction: not yet overturned, but revived issues on appeal
Trump was convicted in May 2024 on 34 counts of falsifying business records in connection with a $130,000 hush-money payment; that conviction remains on the books in state court, though sentencing in January 2025 resulted in an unconditional discharge [4] [2]. Separately, a three-judge panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered a federal district judge to reexamine whether parts of the Manhattan case should have been moved to federal court because of a Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity — the appeals court instructed reconsideration, not an outright reversal of the conviction [2] [3]. Multiple outlets reported the appeals panel “revived” Trump’s bid to remove the case to federal court and said the panel “express[ed] no view” on how the district judge should resolve the immunity questions [3] [6] [2].
3. What the appeals action means — and what it doesn’t
The 2nd Circuit’s order compels further lower‑court analysis of whether evidence admitted at trial implicated immunized official acts under the Supreme Court precedent; the panel did not itself throw out the conviction or rule Trump immune from prosecution [2] [7]. News reports emphasize that the appeals panel asked the district judge to reconsider jurisdictional transfer and the impact of immunity, not to decide the ultimate guilt question. That means Trump’s state conviction remains the operative criminal judgment unless and until a state appellate court, a federal appellate court on full review, or the Supreme Court orders otherwise [2] [3].
4. Other appellate developments and the limits of available reporting
Beyond the New York civil reversal and the 2nd Circuit’s reexamination order in the hush‑money criminal matter, the search results show appellate activity in other Trump‑related litigation (e.g., efforts to vacate or shift cases, appeals over sanctions or contempt findings), but they do not document other criminal convictions having been reversed on appeal in the sources supplied [8] [9] [5]. Wikipedia’s aggregation notes various case pauses and procedural rulings — including a Georgia Court of Appeals decision disqualifying a prosecutor in that state case — but the provided excerpt does not assert that any criminal conviction was vacated there on appeal [4].
5. Conflicting framings and reader takeaways
Reporting sources have competing tones: partisan releases and conservative politicians frame appellate reversals as vindication [1]; mainstream outlets and wire services stress that appellate orders so far are procedural and limited in scope, particularly in the Manhattan criminal matter [2] [3]. Readers should note the difference between an appeals court ordering reconsideration of jurisdictional or evidentiary questions (which can lead to vacatur later) and an appeals court actually reversing a conviction; the former is what the 2nd Circuit did in the hush‑money case, while the civil judgment was directly overturned in New York’s appeals court per the Stefanik release [2] [1].
Limitations: these conclusions rely only on the results you provided; the full appellate opinions, dates, and legal reasoning are not contained in those snippets and are therefore not summarized here [1] [2] [3]. If you want, I can fetch the actual appellate opinions or wider contemporaneous reporting to confirm specifics such as the appeals court names, panel authors, and narrow legal holdings.