On Sunday, former President Donald Trump publicly criticized New York Judge Arthur Engoron, who presided over his state civil fraud trial, calling him ‘incompetent,’ ‘crooked,’ and nearly as ‘corrupt’ as New York Attorney General Letitia James. This came as a New York appellate court overturned a $500 million penalty against Trump, a major legal victory for the former president. The ruling was part of the ongoing civil fraud case brought by James, who has been a vocal critic of Trump for years.
The appellate court determined that the $500 million penalty was excessive and violated the Eighth Amendment, effectively wiping out the fine. However, the court upheld the liability findings against Trump’s company and family, affirming that the Attorney General acted within her authority. The court also approved injunctive relief against the Trump Organization, which means the company is still facing legal consequences, though the financial penalty has been removed.
Trump’s criticism of Judge Engoron, who had previously ruled against him, intensified after the appellate decision. In a statement on Truth Social, Trump claimed that the judge was ‘highly overturned’ and refused to acknowledge the court’s decision. He accused Engoron of being part of a corrupt system aimed at disgracing him and his family. Trump’s allies have long accused Engoron of bias, arguing that his impartiality in the non-jury trial was compromised by his alleged political leanings.
The case involves allegations that Trump exaggerated the value of his assets to secure more favorable terms from a lender his real estate business worked with. While the court found that the Trump Organization was liable for the fraud, the excessive penalty was rejected. The dissenting opinion from Judge David Friedman argued the case was politically motivated, with James using Section 63(12) of New York’s Executive Law to target Trump. He called the use of this section ‘unprecedented and political,’ claiming it granted James ‘essentially limitless power to prosecute her political enemies.’
The ruling has significant implications for both Trump and James. The case is now likely to be appealed to New York’s highest court, the Court of Appeals, as James has announced her intention to appeal. The case not only highlights the legal battles surrounding Trump’s business dealings but also underscores the broader political tensions between the former president and his critics.
In addition, the investigation by the Justice Department into Trump and the allegations against James for mortgage fraud have added complexity to the situation. James has denounced the probe as a ‘revenge tour’ for the civil fraud suit, while the DOJ maintains it is a legitimate legal inquiry. The case has become a focal point for the ongoing legal and political conflict between Trump and his opponents, with high stakes for both sides.
The outcome of this case could have long-term financial consequences for Trump and his business empire, as well as implications for the legal proceedings against him. The ruling underscores the contentious nature of the trial and the broader implications for those involved. Trump’s public attacks on the judge and legal system reflect the intensity of his response to the case, which he sees as a significant setback in his legal challenges.