![\"Appeals](\"https:\/\/news2.watchtowatch.top\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/Screenshot_7-1-6.png\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
A federal appeals court on Thursday allowed President Donald Trump to move forward with his effort to overturn his criminal conviction in the hush money case in New York City.<\/p>\n
Trump is seeking to transfer the case from New York state court to federal court, arguing that a federal judge should dismiss the jury\u2019s 34-count guilty verdict based on the Supreme Court\u2019s recent ruling on presidential immunity,\u00a0The Hill reported.<\/p>\n
A three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit said it \u201ccannot be confident\u201d that the lower court properly weighed Trump\u2019s arguments in his effort to transfer the case to federal court.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe court bypassed what we consider to be important issues bearing on the ultimate issue of good cause,\u201d the panel noted in its ruling.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe leave it to the able and experienced District Judge to decide whether to solicit further briefing from the parties or hold a hearing to help it resolve these issues,\u201d the panel added.<\/p>\n
The panel included U.S. Circuit Judges Raymond Lohier and Susan Carney, both appointed by former President Obama, as well as U.S. Circuit Judge Myrna P\u00e9rez, who was appointed by former President Biden.<\/p>\n
Trump was convicted last year on charges of falsifying business records related to payments intended to conceal an alleged affair with adult film actress Stormy Daniels before the 2016 presidential election.<\/p>\n
\u201cPresident Trump continues to win in his fight against Radical Democrat Lawfare,\u201d a spokesperson for Trump\u2019s legal team said in a statement. \u201cThe Supreme Court\u2019s historic decision on Immunity, the Federal and New York State Constitutions, and other established legal precedent mandate that the Witch Hunt perpetrated by the Manhattan DA be immediately overturned and dismissed.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cPresident Trump will keep defeating Democrat weaponization at every turn as he focuses on his singular mission to Make America Great Again,\u201d the spokesperson added.<\/p>\n
It\u2019s been a rough few weeks for James as she battles her own personal court case.<\/p>\n
The judge presiding over New York Attorney General Letitia James\u2019 mortgage fraud case on Friday rejected a motion seeking to compel federal prosecutors to maintain a log of all their communications with the media.<\/p>\n
Defense attorney Abbe Lowell had filed the request last week, following James\u2019 arraignment on charges of bank fraud and making false statements. The motion cited a report alleging that U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan exchanged a series of encrypted Signal messages with a reporter regarding the case,\u00a0the New York Post reported.<\/p>\n
Walker further wrote that while Halligan\u2019s Signal chat with Lawfare senior editor Anna Bower earlier this month was \u201cunusual,\u201d he nevertheless declined to offer an opinion \u201con whether they were improper in any sense, either legal or ethical.\u201d<\/p>\n
He went on to order federal prosecutors to follow all rules of the court but did not suggest that they had violated any so far.<\/p>\n
He also ordered a \u201clitigation hold preventing the deletion or destruction of any records or communications having to do with the investigation or prosecution of this case.\u201d<\/p>\n
Halligan\u2019s Signal messages to the reporter were configured to automatically disappear after eight hours, The Post reported.<\/p>\n
The judge did not address whether Halligan\u2019s communications \u2014 which reportedly disputed a New York Times story revealing that James\u2019 grandniece told a grand jury she had never paid rent on the Norfolk, Va., property at the center of the case \u2014 constituted material subject to discovery requirements.<\/p>\n
In response to James\u2019 motion, federal prosecutors requested that Judge Walker impose a gag order on the New York attorney general \u2014 a request he declined.<\/p>\n
James pleaded not guilty last week to one count of bank fraud and one count of making a false statement to a financial institution.<\/p>\n
According to the indictment, the longtime Trump adversary purchased a three-bedroom, one-bathroom home on Peronne Avenue in Norfolk on August 17, 2020, using a $109,600 loan that included a \u201csecond home rider\u201d identifying her as the sole occupant. That designation allegedly allowed James to secure more favorable mortgage terms, saving her nearly $19,000.<\/p>\n
However, prosecutors say the home \u201cwas not occupied or used\u201d by James, but \u201cwas instead used as a rental investment property\u201d to house her grandniece, Nakia Thompson.<\/p>\n
If convicted on both counts, James faces up to 60 years in prison and a $2 million fine.<\/p>\n
It began as another routine Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing\u2014until the subject of South African refugees ignited a rare, racially charged confrontation. What started as a debate over refugee policy morphed into a tense, public showdown with implications far beyond Washington.<\/span><\/p>\n At the heart of the controversy: dozens of white South African farmers, known as Afrikaners, who were recently granted expedited refugee status by the U.S. State Department. The move stirred fierce debate. Critics, led by Senator Tim\u00a0Kaine (D\u2013Va.), accused the administration of playing favorites based on skin color, while supporters argued it was a humanitarian gesture responding to real persecution.<\/span><\/p>\n Kaine\u2019s Charge: Favoritism or Fairness?<\/strong> Rubio\u2019s Rebuttal: Sovereign Picking, Not Prejudice<\/strong><\/p>\n Tension Peaks: Who\u2019s Playing the Race Card?<\/strong> Why It Matters<\/strong><\/p>\n Broader Fallout<\/strong> What Comes Next?<\/strong> What began as a hearing about migration morphed into a cultural moment: two powerful voices duking it out over race, policy, and principle. Neither side blinked\u2014or backed down. But the real verdict lies in how America continues to define refuge\u2026and whether the nation can reconcile race, representation, and rule of law.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" A federal appeals court on Thursday allowed President Donald Trump to move forward with his effort to overturn his criminal conviction in the hush money case in New York City. Trump is…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":17972,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-17973","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hot-news"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t
Kaine pointed out that South Africa now has a government of national unity, including Afrikaner representation at the ministerial level. He labeled the persecution claims as \u201cspecious\u201d and questioned why Afrikaners deserved special treatment when countless others\u2014Uyghurs, Rohingya, LGBTQ+ individuals in authoritarian regimes\u2014remain in crisis zones and aren\u2019t fast-tracked for safety.\u00a0<\/span>His challenge struck at the core:\u00a0Should refugee policy be race-blind?<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i.ytimg.com\/vi\/RwP-aE7nDiI\/maxresdefault.jpg?sqp=-oaymwEmCIAKENAF8quKqQMa8AEB-AH-CYAC0AWKAgwIABABGHIgRygiMA8=&rs=AOn4CLBYXeklWRAvVdHauO2a-ATpZ69Juw\")
When Kaine probed, \u201cIs it acceptable to choose based on skin color?\u201d, Rubio counter-punched: \u201cI\u2019m not arguing that\u2014you are, because you don\u2019t like that they\u2019re white\u201d.\u00a0<\/span>He defended the program as a sovereign prerogative: the U.S. has both the right\u2014and responsibility\u2014to select refugees who align with national interests. He maintained the Afrikaners fit legal refugee criteria, citing the destruction of farms and targeted violence.\u00a0<\/span>When Kaine said such a preference contradicts notions of evenhanded policy, Rubio calmly replied, \u201cOur foreign policy does not require evenhandedness\u201d.<\/span><\/p>\n
As the exchange escalated, tensions mounted. Kaine pushed back:\u00a0\u201cBased on the color of somebody\u2019s skin?\u201d<\/em>\u00a0Rubio fired again:\u00a0\u201cYou\u2019re the one that\u2019s talking about the color of their skin, not me\u201d.<\/em><\/span>\u00a0It was a high-stakes faceoff, with each man accusing the other of politicizing race. The room fell silent\u2014a rare, chilling hush in Senate chambers.<\/span><\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/pbs.twimg.com\/amplify_video_thumb\/1924875361424441347\/img\/Sz7_oF6Gge5t9n1D.jpg:large\")
On the surface, it\u2019s a debate about administrative discretion. But beneath lies a deeper cultural fault line. In an era of polarized policies\u2014from asylum caps to detainment measures\u2014a racial subtext colors how refugee decisions are perceived and contested. Kaine\u2019s insistence on universal standards reflects broader Democratic calls for equality; Rubio\u2019s stance channels Republican emphasis on control and national interest. The result? A debate that echoes major electoral themes ahead.<\/span><\/p>\n
The implications reach far beyond this hearing. Critics\u2014like Senator Chris Van Hollen\u2014have decried the move as \u201cglobal apartheid,\u201d arguing it turns an emergency safety program into a political spotlight.<\/span>\u00a0Abroad, South Africa\u2019s foreign ministry says claims of Afrikaner persecution are \u201cunfounded\u201d.<\/span>\u00a0And domestically, the issue feeds into an explosive conversation about how America defines compassion, fairness, and identity.<\/p>\n
Will the Trump-era policy expand or be eviscerated by future administrations? Will this clash recalibrate how Congress oversees refugee decisions? And above all: can refugee programs ever transcend partisan optics\u2014or are they destined to reflect them?<\/p>\n