Former President Donald Trump has launched a major appeal in his ongoing legal battle, targeting the prosecution by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg as one of the most politically charged cases in American history.

Late Monday evening, Trump’s legal team submitted a 111-page document to the New York Appellate Division, seeking to overturn his conviction on 34 counts of falsifying business records. The filing frames the prosecution as less a pursuit of justice and more a political crusade. “This was never about justice,” one attorney declared, “it was about headlines, power and one man’s obsession with taking down a political opponent.”

The root of the case goes back to bookkeeping entries tied to alleged payments made in 2016—well before Trump entered the White House. District Attorney Bragg, who ran partly on a platform of holding Trump accountable, maintained that these entries breached state statutes because they concealed an additional crime. Critics, however, say that even Bragg’s own former prosecutors admitted the legal theory was a stretch—characterizing it as “creative use” of a misdemeanor statute elevated into a felony for political gain.

Nonetheless, a Manhattan jury found Trump guilty earlier this year. From the outset, Trump vowed to appeal, calling the trial “a disgrace to American justice.”

Now, his appeal—described by his team as a “powerhouse filing”—sets out a sweeping set of constitutional and procedural arguments aimed at dismantling the case. Among the key claims: Bragg’s prosecution violated state and federal constitutional protections, including due process and presidential immunity. Trump’s lawyers point in particular to a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision affirming immunity for former presidents in certain official-act prosecutions, which they say directly supports their argument.

“This case was nothing more than an attempt to criminalize routine business activity and silence political opposition,” said Steven Cheung, a Trump spokesperson. In their statement, Trump’s team labeled the prosecution part of what they called a broader campaign of “Radical Democrat Lawfare.” They argue a bookkeeping law was distorted into a political weapon, with no precedent for similar record-keeping cases producing such charges.

The implications go beyond Trump himself. If the appellate court sides with him, it could reshape the scope of state prosecutorial power over federal officials—especially for acts tangentially tied to national campaigns or public service. Constitutional scholar John Yoo noted that a win here “could effectively redefine the boundaries of state authority over federal actors.”

Proponents of the appeal say the central claim is that political bias corrupted the judicial process. Trump’s lawyers contend that Bragg targeted Trump because of his political identity—not because any objective criminal wrongdoing was evident. The argument also takes aim at jury instructions, alleging they permitted jurors to convict without clear agreement on what underlying crime the bookkeeping entries were meant to conceal. Former federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy observed that ambiguity of that nature raises serious due-process concerns: “If the jury wasn’t required to agree on what secondary crime was being covered up, that’s a serious due-process problem.”

Speaking at a private fundraiser Tuesday, Trump was unflinching. “This was a total sham from the beginning,” he declared. “They can’t beat us at the ballot box, so they’re trying to beat us in the courtroom.” He framed the appeal as more than a personal fight: “This isn’t just about me. This is about stopping corrupt prosecutors from using the law as a political weapon. If they can do it to me, they can do it to anyone.”

Bragg’s office, for its part, dismissed the appeal as “a predictable political stunt,” maintaining the conviction was supported by evidence and proper procedure. Still, some current and former New York prosecutors have privately expressed concern that the case may damage the perception of the justice system even among critics of Trump.

The appellate process is expected to unfold over months, potentially stretching into early 2026. If Trump wins at this level, the goal would be full dismissal rather than simply a retrial. In the meantime, Trump is juggling his legal fight with political ambitions—continuing to campaign, fundraise, and cast the narrative as one of institutional resistance.

For Trump, this appeal marks another pivotal chapter in a long and contentious saga. But it also reinforces a narrative he has long embraced—that of an outsider taking on entrenched establishments. With this high-stakes legal challenge now on record, the fight against Bragg’s Manhattan case has entered what may be its most consequential phase yet.