Trump in Court: Convictions, Civil Judgments, and Second-Term Lawsuits

Donald Trump’s legal docket is unlike that of any other American president. He stands convicted of 34 felonies in New York and is appealing. Three other criminal prosecutions against him have been dismissed. He owes roughly $88 million in civil judgments to writer E. Jean Carroll, both upheld on appeal. A New York civil fraud case stripped him of a $464 million penalty but left business restrictions in place. And as president, he faces more than 750 lawsuits challenging his second-term executive actions, with 31 of them already at the Supreme Court. This guide walks through the Trump court cases that remain active, the ones that have ended, and the rulings that have reshaped presidential power along the way.

The Manhattan Hush Money Conviction

On May 30, 2024, a Manhattan jury convicted Trump on all 34 felony counts of falsifying business records tied to hush money payments made during the 2016 presidential campaign.¹ Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg brought the case, which centered on reimbursements to Trump’s former attorney Michael Cohen for a $130,000 payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels. Prosecutors argued the reimbursements were disguised as legal expenses to conceal violations of state election law.

On January 10, 2025, Justice Juan M. Merchan imposed an “unconditional discharge,” a sentence that carries no jail time, probation, or other requirements.¹ The sentence left Trump as the first former president convicted of a felony, with no practical penalty attached.

Trump filed a formal appeal on October 27, 2025. The 96-page brief filed with the Appellate Division’s First Department argued that the Supreme Court’s 2024 presidential immunity ruling required excluding certain evidence, that Justice Merchan should have recused himself, and that prosecutors relied on a flawed theory stacking time-barred misdemeanors into a felony charge.²³ As of mid-2026, no ruling has issued.

The Three Dismissed Criminal Cases

Three other criminal cases against Trump are over, each ended short of trial.

Federal Election Interference

A federal grand jury in Washington, D.C., indicted Trump on August 1, 2023, on four counts tied to efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election: conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of an official proceeding, and conspiracy against rights.⁴ Special Counsel Jack Smith led the prosecution. The case was derailed first by Trump’s immunity challenge, which produced the Supreme Court’s July 2024 immunity ruling, and then by the 2024 election. After Trump won, Smith moved to dismiss under longstanding Justice Department policy against prosecuting a sitting president. Judge Tanya Chutkan dismissed the indictment without prejudice on November 25, 2024, meaning charges could in theory be refiled after Trump leaves office.⁵ Smith resigned in January 2025.⁶

Classified Documents

Trump and co-defendants Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira faced charges in the Southern District of Florida over the alleged mishandling of classified materials at Mar-a-Lago. In July 2024, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the entire case, ruling that Smith’s appointment as special counsel was unlawful. The Justice Department initially appealed but reversed course after Trump took office. On January 29, 2025, prosecutors asked the Eleventh Circuit to drop the appeal with prejudice. Both co-defendants consented.⁶

Georgia RICO

A Fulton County grand jury indicted Trump and 18 co-defendants in August 2023 under Georgia’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, alleging a coordinated effort to overturn the state’s 2020 election results. Four defendants took plea deals before the case stalled.⁷ After District Attorney Fani Willis was disqualified over her relationship with special prosecutor Nathan Wade, Peter Skandalakis of the Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council of Georgia took over. Reportedly unable to find another attorney willing to handle the case, Skandalakis named himself prosecutor in November 2025 and dropped it, calling it “illogical and unduly burdensome” to pursue a case that would not reach trial until 2029 at the earliest. Judge Scott McAfee formally dismissed the charges on November 26, 2025.⁸

The E. Jean Carroll Civil Judgments

Writer E. Jean Carroll won two civil cases against Trump, both now affirmed on appeal.

The first trial in 2023 produced a jury finding of sexual abuse and defamation and an award of approximately $5 million. The Second Circuit affirmed in June 2025 and later denied Trump’s request for rehearing by the full court.⁹ Trump has petitioned the Supreme Court to review the verdict.¹⁰

The second trial, in January 2024, resulted in an $83.3 million defamation award: $65 million in punitive damages and $18.3 million in compensatory damages. The jury found Trump had repeatedly defamed Carroll, including during the trial itself. A Second Circuit panel upheld the judgment in September 2025, calling the “degree of reprehensibility” of Trump’s conduct “perhaps unprecedented” and the damages “fair and reasonable.”¹⁰ In April 2026, the Second Circuit denied Trump’s petition for en banc rehearing, rejecting his presidential immunity defense on the ground that he had waived it.⁹

The New York Civil Fraud Case

New York Attorney General Letitia James sued Trump, his two eldest sons, and several business associates, alleging that they systematically inflated his net worth and property values to secure favorable bank loans and insurance terms. After a 2023 trial, Justice Arthur Engoron imposed a judgment of approximately $464 million in disgorgement.¹¹

In August 2025, the Appellate Division’s First Department unanimously vacated the entire financial award, ruling it unconstitutionally excessive under the Eighth Amendment. The five-justice panel split on the underlying fraud finding, with two justices favoring affirmance, two wanting a new trial, and one arguing for outright dismissal. The judgment was technically affirmed to avoid deadlock, but with no clear majority opinion on liability.¹¹ The court kept certain business restrictions in place, including bans on Trump and his sons serving as officers of New York businesses and on obtaining loans from financial institutions with New York branches, each lasting up to three years.¹²

Both sides are appealing to the Court of Appeals, New York’s highest court. Trump filed a 119-page brief in April 2026 to reverse the remaining fraud finding; James is fighting to reinstate the financial penalty.¹²

The Presidential Immunity Ruling That Reshaped the Criminal Docket

The Supreme Court’s July 1, 2024 decision in Trump v. United States is the single ruling most responsible for the collapse of the federal criminal cases. Writing for a 6-3 majority, Chief Justice John Roberts established a three-tiered framework: absolute immunity for actions within a president’s core constitutional powers, such as pardons and appointments; presumptive immunity for other official acts, rebuttable only if prosecutors can show that prosecution would not threaten executive branch functioning; and no immunity for unofficial conduct.¹³

The ruling also prohibited the use of evidence of official acts to prove liability for unofficial acts, which the majority said would “eviscerate” the immunity it had recognized. It declared Trump absolutely immune for discussions with Justice Department officials about election investigations and presumptively immune for his interactions with Vice President Mike Pence over the certification of electoral votes. The district court was tasked with categorizing every remaining allegation as official or unofficial. That process was overtaken by the election.

Second-Term Lawsuits Against the Administration

As of mid-2026, more than 750 lawsuits have been filed challenging second-term Trump administration policies. Over 400 cases are actively proceeding while the challenged policy remains in effect, and roughly 170 cases have resulted in courts partially or fully blocking the policy. Of 172 cases with final decisions, plaintiffs have won 67 and the administration 7; the remaining 96 were dismissed on procedural grounds. Some 445 cases have at least one active appeal, and 31 have reached the Supreme Court.¹⁴

Tariffs Struck Down

On February 20, 2026, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not authorize the president to impose tariffs. Chief Justice Roberts wrote the principal opinion, joined in full or in part by Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, Barrett, and Jackson. Justices Kavanaugh, Thomas, and Alito dissented.¹⁵ The administration had invoked IEEPA to impose sweeping duties: 25% on most Canadian and Mexican imports, 10% on most Chinese imports, and at least 10% on goods from nearly every other trading partner.¹⁶ The majority held that IEEPA’s authority to “regulate” importation does not include the power to tax, noting that the statute had never been used for tariffs in its 50-year history and that the Constitution assigns the taxing power to Congress. A three-justice plurality applied the major questions doctrine. Justice Kavanaugh’s dissent warned the government “may be required to refund billions of dollars,” though the majority left remedial questions for future proceedings.

Nationwide Injunctions Limited

In Trump v. CASA, decided June 27, 2025, the Court ruled 6-3 that federal district courts lack the power to issue universal or nationwide injunctions. Justice Barrett wrote the majority opinion, holding that the equitable authority Congress granted under the Judiciary Act of 1789 is limited to party-specific relief.¹⁷ The case arose from challenges to Trump’s birthright citizenship executive order, though the ruling did not address that order’s merits. Justice Sotomayor warned in dissent that the decision could lead to fragmented outcomes in which the executive branch ignores judicial rulings as to anyone not named as a plaintiff.¹⁸

National Guard Federalization Blocked

After protests at an ICE processing facility in Illinois, Trump federalized 300 members of the Illinois National Guard in October 2025. On December 23, 2025, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that the president likely lacked authority to do so under the relevant statute, which permits federalization only when the president is “unable with the regular forces” to execute federal law.¹⁹ Five justices joined the majority opinion, with Justice Kavanaugh joining in the result. The ruling held that the administration had not shown it was unable to enforce the law using the active-duty military and had not identified the legal authority for the military to act domestically.²⁰ Justice Alito, joined by Justice Thomas, dissented.

Immigration Cases

Immigration policy has produced the largest share of second-term court battles.

Alien Enemies Act Deportations

In March 2025, Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport Venezuelan nationals the administration alleged were members of the gang Tren de Aragua. The deportees were sent to El Salvador’s CECOT prison. On April 7, 2025, the Supreme Court unanimously held that detainees facing removal under the Act are entitled to notice and the opportunity to challenge their deportation through habeas corpus.²¹ On May 16, 2025, the Court ruled 7-2 in A.A.R.P. v. Trump that the roughly 24 hours of notice the administration had been providing was constitutionally inadequate, and it enjoined further removals under the Act while the case proceeded. Justices Alito and Thomas dissented.²² The Court did not resolve whether the Act can lawfully be used for gang-related deportations. A Fifth Circuit panel subsequently ruled 2-1 that the president lacked that authority, and en banc rehearing is pending.¹⁴

The Abrego Garcia Case

Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland resident, was deported to CECOT on March 15, 2025, despite a 2019 immigration judge’s order barring his removal based on a finding that he faced a “clear probability of future persecution” in El Salvador.²³ ICE acknowledged the deportation was an “administrative error.”²⁴ U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis ordered his return by April 7, 2025. On April 10, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the government must “facilitate” his release from Salvadoran custody, though it questioned the lower court’s authority to order his physical return and directed the judge to clarify the order with “due regard for the deference owed to the Executive Branch in the conduct of foreign affairs.” Months passed before action was taken. When Abrego Garcia was returned to the United States on June 6, 2025, it was to face human smuggling charges. Attorney General Pam Bondi said the return occurred after prosecutors presented El Salvador with an arrest warrant. Those charges were dismissed in May 2026, with the judge ruling that the government had failed to rebut a “presumption of vindictiveness” regarding the prosecution.

Birthright Citizenship

On his first day back in office, Trump signed an executive order ending birthright citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants or immigrants in the country on a temporary basis. Multiple federal courts immediately blocked it; one judge called it “blatantly unconstitutional.” The order has never taken effect. The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Trump v. Barbara on April 1, 2026, with Trump attending in person, and a majority of justices appeared skeptical of the administration’s position. A ruling is expected by late June or early July 2026.²⁵

Temporary Protected Status

On June 25, 2026, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in Mullin v. Doe that the administration could terminate Temporary Protected Status for nationals of Haiti and Syria, finding that the TPS statute broadly bars judicial review of the Secretary of Homeland Security’s designation and termination decisions. Justice Alito wrote the majority opinion. In dissent, Justice Kagan, joined by Justices Sotomayor and Jackson, argued that judicial review should remain available for procedural violations and said evidence pointed to a racial motive, including “statements by the President so repellent and racially inflected that the majority declines to put them in print.”²⁶

Pending Fights Over Firing Independent Agency Leaders

Two pending Supreme Court cases could redefine the president’s power to remove leaders of independent regulatory agencies.

In Trump v. Cook, the administration tried to fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, citing alleged mortgage fraud. A federal judge in Washington blocked the removal, and the D.C. Circuit declined to disturb that ruling. The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on January 21, 2026, with a majority appearing inclined to prevent the firing. Lower courts found that Cook “could not be removed on the basis of conduct that predated her joining the Fed board” and that she had a “property right to her Fed post.”²⁷

In Trump v. Slaughter, the Court is considering whether to overrule Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, the 1935 precedent that protects independent agency commissioners from being fired without cause. The case grew out of Trump’s removal of FTC Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter in March 2025. The Court granted review on an accelerated basis, heard oral arguments on December 8, 2025, and stayed a lower court order that had reinstated Slaughter.²⁸ A ruling overturning Humphrey’s Executor would give the president at-will firing power over the leaders of more than two dozen independent commissions.²⁹

DOJ Prosecutions of Trump’s Critics

The Trump Justice Department has pursued criminal cases against several people the president has publicly described as adversaries.

Former FBI Director James Comey was indicted in September 2025 in the Eastern District of Virginia on charges of lying to Congress and obstructing a congressional proceeding, based on 2020 Senate testimony about authorizing media leaks related to FBI investigations. A judge dismissed the charges on November 24, 2025. The indictment was signed by Lindsey Halligan, an interim U.S. Attorney whom critics described as lacking prosecutorial experience; career prosecutors in the same office had previously determined there was insufficient evidence to bring charges.³⁰³¹

Former National Security Adviser John Bolton was indicted in October 2025 in a documents investigation, following an August 2025 raid on his home and office. The administration had revoked his Secret Service protection in January 2025.³⁰

New York Attorney General Letitia James, who had brought the civil fraud case against Trump, was indicted in October 2025 on charges of bank fraud and making false statements to a financial institution, allegedly for misrepresenting the intended use of a property on a loan application. James called the charges “baseless” and a “weaponization of our justice system.” A federal judge later ruled Halligan’s appointment as U.S. Attorney unlawful and dismissed the indictment. When the DOJ attempted to refile, two separate grand juries refused to indict. According to House Judiciary Committee Democrats, the department was reportedly pursuing yet another investigation as of March 2026.³¹³²

1
New York Times. Trump Hush Money Sentencing
2
ABC News. Trump Formally Appeals New York Hush Money Conviction
3
Politico. Donald Trump Appeal Hush Money Conviction
4
Justia. Trump v. United States
5
NPR. Jan 6 Trump Case
6
NBC News. Justice Department Drops Classified Documents Case
7
CNN. Georgia Prosecutor Drops Trump Election Interference Case
8
Georgia Recorder. Fulton County Election Interference Case Against Trump and His Allies Is Dismissed
9
Courthouse News. No En Banc in Trump Appeals of E. Jean Carroll Verdict
10
NBC News. Appeals Court Upholds E. Jean Carroll’s $83 Million Judgment
11
Jurist. New York Appeals Court Tosses $465 Million Award in Trump Civil Fraud Case
12
Politico. Donald Trump Civil Fraud Appeal
13
SCOTUSblog. Justices Rule Trump Has Some Immunity From Prosecution
14
New York Times. Trump Administration Lawsuits
15
SCOTUSblog. A Breakdown of the Court’s Tariff Decision
16
U.S. Supreme Court. Learning Resources v. Trump
17
U.S. Supreme Court. Trump v. CASA, Inc.
18
SCOTUSblog. Trump v. CASA, Inc.
19
SCOTUSblog. Supreme Court Rejects Trump’s Effort to Deploy National Guard in Illinois
20
Just Security. Trump v. Illinois Supreme Court
21
U.S. Supreme Court. Trump v. J.G.G.
22
U.S. Supreme Court. A.A.R.P. v. Trump
23
U.S. Supreme Court. Noem v. Abrego Garcia
24
ABC News. Timeline Wrongful Deportation Kilmar Abrego Garcia
25
SCOTUSblog. Supreme Court Appears Likely to Side Against Trump on Birthright Citizenship
26
SCOTUSblog. Supreme Court Allows Trump Administration to End Removal Protections for Syrian and Haitian Nationals
27
Politico. Supreme Court Lisa Cook Federal Reserve
28
SCOTUSblog. Trump v. Slaughter
29
New York Times. Supreme Court Major Cases
30
USA Today. Justice Department Independence James Comey Donald Trump
31
ABC News. Trump-Appointed Prosecutor Seeks Indictment New York AG
32
House Judiciary Committee Democrats. Judiciary Democrats Launch Investigation Into DOJ’s Retaliatory Prosecution of New York State Attorney General Letitia James