Trump Must Pay $500M Civil Fraud Fine, President Or Not
Donald Trump may have secured the presidency and all the authority it entails, but the New York Attorney General’s office maintains that he cannot sidestep a hefty civil fraud fine of nearly $500 million—a penalty his lawyers sought to dismiss just weeks ago.
“The ordinary burdens of civil litigation do not impede the president’s official duties in a way that violates the U.S. Constitution,” wrote Judith Vale, New York’s deputy solicitor general, in a December 9 letter addressed to Trump’s lawyer, John Sauer.
Interestingly, Trump plans to nominate Sauer as the nation’s solicitor general.
The case stems from a February ruling by New York Judge Arthur Engoron, who found Trump liable for inflating his net worth and manipulating his financial records.
According to the ruling, Trump exaggerated the value of his real estate holdings and falsified financial statements to secure favorable loan terms and other lucrative deals, giving him an unfair edge in the market.
Trump has appealed the ruling, and a panel of judges on the New York appeals court recently expressed skepticism about the steep $489 million fine. While the court hasn’t issued a final decision, the judges hinted that the penalty might be excessive and could warrant adjustment.
Allegations of Overreach
Trump’s legal team argues that New York Attorney General Letitia James exceeded her authority in pursuing civil fraud charges against Trump, the Trump Organization, and its executives. In November, Sauer called on James to drop the judgment and permanently dismiss all claims against Trump.
In his letter, Sauer urged for an end to what he described as partisan-driven legal battles. Referring to Trump’s 2016 election victory, he argued that resolving the legal conflicts surrounding the president-elect and his family would help ease political divisions in the country.
“As counsel for President Trump in this appeal — and now as his nominee for Solicitor General of the United States — I have had the opportunity to experience this partisan division personally,” Sauer wrote. “I strongly believe it is necessary for the health of our Republic for the strife and lawfare to end. You now have the singular opportunity to help cure this division.”
Long-Running Investigation
The hefty fine is the culmination of an 11-week trial, itself the result of years of investigation into Trump and the Trump Organization. In her response, Vale defended the legitimacy of the legal process, dismissing Trump’s repeated claims that the charges were politically motivated.
“Multiple courts have rejected claims that the investigation or action were brought in anything other than good faith,” Vale wrote, emphasizing that the investigation was rooted in lawful scrutiny, not political bias.
Vale also underscored that Trump’s presidency has no bearing on his appeal of the fine, asserting that the legal system cannot exempt the president from accountability in civil cases.
As the legal battle continues, Trump’s team is banking on a reduced penalty, while New York’s Attorney General remains firm in her commitment to holding Trump accountable for financial misconduct.
Simply, there’s nowhere to run, Vale explained, because this has never been and is not a criminal matter. No criminal sanction was ever placed on Trump related to this case, and as much as he may detest the Office of Special Counsel in Washington, D.C., or the district attorney’s office in New York where Alvin Bragg charged Trump criminally, those issues “are irrelevant here,” she wrote.
There was “no merit” and “no basis” to Trump’s claims that his appeal will impact his official duties in a way that violates the Constitution, Vale added, noting that other presidents, including Bill Clinton, have faced civil claims while in office.
“The trial is over, final judgment has been rendered and defendants’ appeal to the First Department has been fully submitted and argued. Mr. Trump’s official duties will not be impeded while awaiting the First Department’s decision.
Nor will his duties be impeded if further appeals in this action are filed. Those appeals will be handled primarily by Mr. Trump’s appellate lawyers, and any consultations Mr. Trump may have with those attorneys about appeals will not plausibly impose an unconstitutional burden,” Vale wrote.