Trump asks New York’s top court to toss civil fraud judgment

MANHATTAN (CN) — President Donald Trump on Wednesday told New York’s highest court that the roughly $500 million civil fraud case against him is based on “political hostility” from New York Attorney General Letitia James, who brought the bombshell lawsuit in 2022.

In a 119-page brief in the New York Court of Appeals, an Albany-based court at the top of the state’s judicial ladder, Trump argues that James never had the authority to try the case in the first place.

“This court should put an end to this politically motivated action,” Trump claims in the new filing.

It’s the president’s latest escalation of attacks on the sweeping fraud case, which has already been severely kneecapped by a state appellate court last summer.

At an 11-week bench trial in 2023, James argued that Trump and his namesake company fraudulently inflated the value of his properties in order to score more favorable loans from banks.

She won the case — New York Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron, now retired, ruled that Trump indeed defrauded the lenders and ordered him to pay more than $460 million in penalties.

But last August, a mid-level appeals court erased the massive fine, calling it “excessive.” It was a huge blow to the attorney general’s marquee litigation, even as the court preserved the underlying fraud findings.

Now, Trump is trying to get what remains of the case tossed. The financial penalty may be gone, but several other repercussions — including a three-year ban on Trump and his two eldest sons from leading New York businesses, as well as a three-year restriction on Trump and his businesses from taking loans in the state — are still in play.

In his brief, Trump argues that James engaged in “uneven enforcement” by taking advantage of New York’s business fraud laws to attack him while he was gearing up for his 2024 presidential run.

“The reason here was pure politics, as Attorney General James’s own statements make clear,” Trump claims, pointing to past speeches from James, who vowed to “bring down President Trump and his real estate empire.”

It was a claim that he repeatedly tried, and ultimately failed, to drive home at trial.

Trump additionally claims that the crux of the case against him, New York Executive Law § 63 (12), has never before been enforced in this way, and that James never explained her rationale for bringing the suit despite never receiving concerns from the banks.

“None of the four lenders or insurers ever complained — before, during, or after trial — that they were even injured, let alone defrauded, in any of their transactions with the Trump Organization,” he argues.

Trump acknowledges that he’s taking the “unusual” position of appealing a ruling that was largely in his favor. Still, he’s calling on the Court of Appeals to “put an end to this legally deficient case,” which was largely predicated on testimony from Trump’s former fixer Michael Cohen.

Cohen has since written on his personal blog that he felt “compelled and coerced” to “deliver what they were seeking,” in reference to the case — a revelation Trump is now using as additional ammunition against the fraud judgment.

“Supreme Court’s intent-to-defraud findings rested, and therefore should fall, on Cohen’s contradictory statements,” Trump claims.

James’ office has also vowed to appeal to the state’s high court in hopes that the court will bring back the financial penalty against Trump and his family. She has until June 23 to file her briefing.

The case has landed James in Trump’s crosshairs during his second presidential term. He has repeatedly attempted to bring criminal charges against James, but thus far fallen short each time. In November, a federal judge in Virginia threw out a mortgage fraud case against her after finding that the district’ s lead prosecutor, Lindsey Halligan, was illegally appointed to her post.

Since then, two grand juries have declined to revive the case.

Follow @Uebey Follow @uebey.bsky.social