On October 3, 2023, in Manhattan Court, New York City, the United States, former US President Donald Trump attended the civil fraud case filed by state Attorney General Letitia James against himself, his adult son, and the Trump Organization and others on trial.
Shannon Stapleton | Reuters
The New York attorney general’s office on Tuesday rejected a request by Donald Trump’s lawyers to drop a massive civil business fraud case that has left the president-elect facing more than $480 million in fines.
Deputy Attorney General Judith Vale wrote in a letter to Trump defense attorney John Sauer: “This office will not provide for the reversal of the final judgment of the New York County Supreme Court in this lawsuit. , or otherwise seek to dismiss the action.
She was responding to a Nov. 26 letter in which Sauer urged state Attorney General Letitia James to dismiss the case “for the health of our republic.”
“President Trump has called for an end to our nation’s partisan conflict and for competing factions to unite for the greater good of the country,” Sauer wrote. fox news the report said.
“This call for unity extends to the legal attacks on him and his family that have permeated recent election cycles,” the defense attorneys wrote.
Sauer argued that continuing the case, which is currently under appeal, would hinder Republicans from carrying out their duties as president.
But Vale wrote on Tuesday that the claim was “baseless.” Trump’s upcoming inauguration has “no impact” on the outcome of the trial or his ongoing efforts to challenge the verdict, she wrote.
“The president does not enjoy immunity from civil suits arising out of unofficial acts, and such suits can be brought during the term of his office,” Vale wrote in the two-page letter.
For that reason, Vale also rejected Sauer’s contention that prosecutors have dropped or delayed some criminal cases against Trump following his Nov. 5 victory over Vice President Kamala Harris.
“This civil enforcement action is not a criminal proceeding, and the (Manhattan) Supreme Court did not impose any criminal sanctions against Mr. Trump or any other defendant,” she wrote.
Special counsel Jack Smith’s decision to dismiss two of his federal cases against Trump and indefinitely delay Trump’s criminal hush-money case “is irrelevant here,” Vale wrote.
The civil case, filed by James in 2022, accuses Trump, his two adult sons, his businesses and key executives within them of falsely inflating Trump’s assets to boost his net worth and obtain financial benefits.
Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron ordered Trump in February to pay more than $450 million in fines and interest after finding he committed fraud and holding a bench trial to determine the penalty.
Engoron’s penalty includes millions of dollars in prejudgment interest and will accrue $111,983 per day before payment. Trump’s total judgments and interest now exceed $486 million, according to data previously provided by the New York Attorney General’s Office.
New York Attorney General Letitia James sits in the courtroom as the civil fraud case against former President Donald Trump and his children is being heard in the New York State Supreme Court on November 3, 2023.
David Sanders | Getty Images
Trump appealed the fraud conviction in February. In March, a New York appeals court reduced to $175 million the amount of bond Trump must post to stay the verdict while he pursues a legal challenge.
During oral arguments in late September, appeals judges questioned whether James went too far, political reporting.
The appeals court has yet to rule.
Sauer argued in the Nov. 26 letter that the continuation of the fraud lawsuit “raises ‘serious and questionable constitutional questions’ … and is materially harmful to the national interest.”
Citing existing precedent that blocks criminal prosecutions of sitting presidents, Sauer argued that “civil fraud enforcement actions raise the same concerns as this one.”
“Allowing such action against a sitting president is ‘dangerous’ because doing so ‘could impose … a burden that would prevent the president from effectively carrying out his constitutional duties,'” he wrote.
Vale dismissed the argument as baseless.
“The ordinary burdens of civil litigation do not interfere with the performance of the President’s official duties in a manner that violates the Constitution of the United States,” she wrote.
“In any event, Mr. Trump will not face any such litigation burden here” because the trial has concluded and the appeal has been fully argued, Vale wrote.
About The Author
