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.
Fact check: What are the most notable lawsuits filed against Donald Trump in 2025?
Executive Summary
Donald Trump faces multiple high-profile legal challenges in 2025 centered on the New York “hush-money” criminal conviction and separate civil defamation claims, with his legal team pursuing appeals that invoke presidential immunity and related defenses while opponents argue those defenses do not apply. The most notable filings this year include appeals seeking to vacate his 34-count conviction in Manhattan and appellate litigation over a $5 million defamation judgment in E. Jean Carroll’s case, developments that could reshape the scope of criminal exposure for a former president and the contours of the public authority defense [1] [2] [3].
1. How Trump’s lawyers frame the hush-money conviction as a presidential-immunity fight
Trump’s legal teams have moved aggressively to attack the New York hush-money verdict by arguing that the prosecution should never have been brought because presidential immunity shields his actions, and therefore the conviction must be reversed. The appeals assert that federal preemption and a lack of criminal intent undercut the state charges, pointing to a July 2024 Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity as a lodestar for their arguments and asserting the decision compels vacatur or dismissal of the case [1] [2]. These filings rely on legal theories that presidential communications and decisions made while in office are immune from state criminal prosecution, and they press the appellate court to interpret the Supreme Court’s guidance expansively to bar these state-level fraud and record-falsification charges [1] [2].
2. The E. Jean Carroll appeal: civil damages and the limits of defamation defenses
Separately, Trump continues to contest a $5 million defamation verdict won by E. Jean Carroll, with his lawyers pursuing appellate review and arguing trial-level errors such as the admission of certain testimony and legal rulings that they say prejudiced the jury. Carroll’s counsel has publicly predicted the Supreme Court will not overturn the award, reflecting confidence in the underlying facts and legal findings, while Trump’s appellate briefs seek to narrow the pathways for recovery or reverse the judgment entirely [3]. This civil litigation underscores a parallel legal risk profile for Trump in 2025: even when criminal liability is contested on immunity grounds, civil verdicts and monetary damages remain significant and proceed through their own appellate trajectories [3].
3. Public authority defense: a pivot point with implications beyond this case
A central legal hinge in the appeals is the public authority defense, which requires a defendant to demonstrate actual authority from a government official to engage in otherwise unlawful conduct; the defense does not rest on a mere belief in authority. Commentators and legal scholars analyzing the appeals caution that establishing a standard for this defense will affect not only Trump’s appeals but also ongoing prosecutions and investigations involving former administration officials and January 6–related matters [4] [5]. The debates in the briefs and scholarly analysis highlight a tension: broad acceptance of the defense could insulate high-level actors from accountability for actions taken while in office, while a narrow reading preserves more space for state criminal enforcement when conduct transgresses statutory boundaries [4] [5].
4. Where the cases stand procedurally and what to expect next from the courts
Procedurally, the hush-money appeal is pending before the New York Appellate Division, First Department, with prosecutors preparing responses to the immunity and preemption arguments and the parties briefing whether the conviction should stand or be vacated. The criminal appeal follows a May 2024 trial that led to a 34-count felony conviction, and the appellate filings this year reframe the legal issues in light of subsequent Supreme Court guidance cited by the defense [1] [2]. The Carroll matter remains in the appeals process as well, with briefs focusing on evidentiary rulings and the correctness of the jury’s verdict; observers expect both paths to include requests for higher-court review if the intermediate appellate panels rule unfavorably to either side [3] [2].
5. Stakes and competing narratives: accountability, precedent, and political context
The appeals present competing narratives with concrete legal stakes: Trump’s camp frames the litigation as a constitutional protection of presidential decision-making and a necessary check on prosecutions that could chill executive action, while opponents argue the prosecutions and civil judgments reflect accountability for unlawful conduct irrespective of office. The outcome will establish precedent on how doctrines like presidential immunity and the public authority defense operate at the state level, influencing future enforcement against former officials and the prosecutorial calculus for politically sensitive cases [1] [5] [4]. Both legal strategy and public messaging will continue to shape perceptions, but the courts’ rulings in 2025 will ultimately determine whether these defenses constrain or validate state-level avenues for redress [1] [3] [4].