Have Trump's appeal of the 34 felonies been apporved?

1. What exactly has been appealed — and by whom?

Trump’s legal team has pursued multiple appellate strategies: a conventional state‑court appeal seeking reversal of the New York conviction, and a separate bid to remove the matter to federal court on presidential‑immunity grounds. News outlets report filings asking appellate judges to overturn the 34‑count falsifying‑business‑records verdict and arguing key trial evidence was protected by the Supreme Court’s immunity decision ^{[1] [4] [7]}.

2. Has an appeals court “approved” the appeal or overturned the verdict?

No source in the set says an appeal has been fully granted in the sense of vacating the conviction. Instead, a federal appeals panel on Nov. 6, 2025 ordered a district judge to reconsider whether the case belongs in federal court — a procedural ruling that gives Trump’s immunity argument new life but does not itself overturn the jury verdict ^{[2] [3] [6]}.

3. What does the Nov. 6, 2025 appeals court order actually do?

The appeals court told a lower‑court judge to re‑examine whether evidence at trial “relates to acts taken under color of the Presidency” and whether Trump diligently tried to move the case; the panel explicitly “express[ed] no view” on the ultimate merits, leaving substantive rulings to the district judge ^{[3] [2]}. That order could accelerate or alter the path of review, but it is not a merits decision clearing or affirming guilt ^[5].

4. How do presidential‑immunity arguments fit into this?

Trump’s lawyers argue the Supreme Court’s post‑trial immunity decision — which recognized some immunity for official acts — shields him from certain state prosecution and that admitting related evidence at trial was “never harmless.” The Department of Justice filed a friend‑of‑the‑court brief adopting aspects of that view, supporting reconsideration of the venue and immunity questions ^{[4] [6]}. Competing viewpoints exist: trial judges and prosecutors previously rejected immunity claims at earlier stages, and the appeals court’s order left open how those claims should be applied ^[5].

5. Timelines and practical implications — what happens next?

If the district judge follows the appeals court’s direction and moves the case to federal court or finds the evidence implicated presidential acts, Trump could get a faster federal review that might ultimately lead to dismissal or appeal to higher courts. Conversely, state appeals remain possible and could take years. Reporting emphasizes this is a procedural detour that could “speed up” a potential exoneration but does not guarantee one ^{[6] [5]}.

6. How do outlets frame the significance and risks?

Major outlets presented the appeals panel’s move as a renewed lifeline for Trump’s legal team ^{[2] [3]}. Some coverage emphasizes the novelty and constitutional stakes of applying post‑Supreme Court immunity rulings to a historic conviction, while other reporting notes judicial caution and that the panel “express[ed] no view” on merits — signaling courts are reluctant to short‑circuit state proceedings without careful analysis ^{[3] [5]}.

7. What is not answered in current reporting?

Available sources do not report that any appellate court has finally vacated or affirmed the 34 felony convictions; they also do not record a final ruling transferring the case to federal court. There is no evidence in these sources that the appeals process has concluded or that sentencing outcomes were altered as a direct result of an approved appeal ^{[1] [2] [6]}.

Bottom line

The appeal is active and has gained a concrete procedural win: a federal appeals court ordered reconsideration of whether the hush‑money prosecution belongs in federal court, reviving Trump’s immunity pathway ^{[2] [3]}. That is not the same as an appellate “approval” that would erase the 34 felony convictions; available reporting shows ongoing litigation and further decisions ahead ^{[5] [6]}.