For the second time in a week, a federal court has rejected Trump's request to move his Manhattan criminal hush money case to federal court, reported MSNBC legal expert Lisa Rubin.
Trump has sought to move the case because some of the planning to send the illegally disguised hush payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels, which formed the basis of the felony conviction against Trump for falsifying business records, occurred while he was in office. He wanted the case moved to federal court to lay the groundwork to classify his actions as at least partially in his official capacity, taking advantage of a Supreme Court decision that presidents have a presumption of immunity for such acts.
However, federal Judge Alvin Hellerstein found there was no good cause to remove the case.
ALSO READ: Why Trump’s Arlington controversy is actually a crime
Even before the ruling came down, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg signaled his intent to shut all of this down, Rubin wrote on X.
"The Manhattan DA's office hasn't said a word in federal court with respect to Trump's efforts to move the hush money case there," she wrote. "But their letter to Judge Merchan makes clear where they stand."
Last week, Rubin reported that Hellerstein, rejected Trump's bid, although the Trump camp denied the situation played out as Rubin claimed.
"First, they remind him that Trump's removal efforts don't preclude him from ruling on two pending motions Trump brought before him: one to set aside the verdict and one to postpone his sentencing," wrote Rubin. "Second, they call out Trump's 'strategic and dilatory litigation tactics,' noting that his new removal effort 'comes nearly ten months after [he] voluntarily abandoned his appeal from his first, unsuccessful effort to remove this case.'"
Moreover, Rubin noted, Bragg's motion reminded the court that all of this comes "three months after he was found guilty by a jury on thirty-four felony counts; and nearly two months after defendant asked this Court to consider his [ ] motion for a new trial."
Sentencing for the case is set to take place later this month, although it remains uncertain whether more delay could occur.
