Letitia James, the Attorney General of New York, has taken a significant step in her ongoing legal battle against former President Donald Trump. Just days later, her office filed a notice of appeal with the state’s court of appeals. They are seeking to overturn a recent decision by an intermediate appellate division. This ruling found that a very large penalty levied against Trump was unconstitutional under the U.S. Constitution’s prohibition on excessive fines. This penalty had ballooned, including interest, to more than $515 million by the time the appellate division rendered its judgment. Today, however, it is again under fire.
In 2022, James filed a lawsuit against Trump. She accused him of falsifying his net worth by billions of dollars on financial disclosures. The lawsuit accuses Trump of repeatedly lying to banks and others about the worth of his most cherished properties. These assets include his golf courses, hotels and other properties, the Trump Tower real estate asset in Manhattan and the Mar-a-Lago Club and estate in south Florida. The case picked up steam when Judge Arthur Engoron found that James had proven Trump engaged in a years-long conspiracy. This ruse required collusion among the high-level executives at his firm to conspire in order to deceive lenders and insurers.
When the appellate division ruled, Trump called it “TOTAL VICTORY,” reveling in the court’s dismissal of the monetary penalty. Though this particular monetary penalty was thrown out, other types of punishment were upheld by the five-judge panel. They provided a deferential endorsement to the trial court’s finding. As we explained here, Trump committed fraud by falsely inflating his wealth on the financial statements he submitted to banks and insurers. This decision of the appellate division was highly controversial, with a majority of the justices declaring the fine “excessive.”
Aside from James’s appeal aiming to restore the financial penalty, Trump filed an appeal of his own just recently. He asked that the court of appeals vacate additional penalties associated with original prosecution. Their punishment—a multiyear ban on Trump and his two oldest sons. This ban inhibits them from gaining the corporate leadership experience they would need to operate in New York.
The repercussions of this legal battle go far beyond fines and purse payouts. Indeed, both sides have publicly stated their intent to have their respective appeals seen through to a favorable result. Depending on the outcome, the case could have far-reaching implications for both Trump’s business interests and political future.