Donald Trump may have won the White House and the powers that come with it, but according to New York Attorney General Letitia James’ office, he cannot escape a roughly $500 million civil fraud fine, as his lawyers insisted 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,” Judith Vale, New York’s deputy solicitor general, wrote in a Dec. 9 letter to Trump’s lawyer, John Sauer.
Trump intends to nominate Sauer to be the nation’s solicitor general.
Trump was found liable for fraudulently inflating his net worth and rigging his financial records in February. New York Judge Arthur Engoron found that Trump overvalued his real estate holdings, lied on financial statements to garner lower interest rates and secured other sweetheart deals that led to huge profits and unfair market advantages.
Trump appealed Engoron’s ruling. A panel of judges on the New York appeals court in September appeared skeptical over the amount of the fine — it totals $489 million — and seemed to hint that the final penalty may need to be lowered.
Trump’s lawyers have routinely argued that James overstepped her authority when prosecuting Trump, the Trump Organization and its executives for civil fraud.
In a November letter, Sauer urged James to drop the judgment and dismiss all claims against Trump with prejudice — meaning they could never be brought again — saying that in the aftermath of Trump’s “historic election victory,” the president-elect had called for “our nation’s partisan strife to end” and that ending that strife would mean an end to the “legal onslaught against him and his family that permeated the most recent election cycle.”
“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, and I strongly believe that 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,” Sauer wrote.
Trump’s fine was the byproduct of an 11-week trial, and that trial was the result of an investigation into Trump and Trump Organization executives that spanned multiple years, Vale wrote in response.
Trump’s claims that charges were political aren’t anything novel either. He’s tried this line of argumentation before, and “multiple courts have rejected claims that the investigation or action were brought in anything other than good faith,” Vale wrote.
Trump’s inauguration has “no bearing” on his appeal of the fine, the letter continued.
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.
Trump spokesman Steven Cheung called the letter “sad and weak” in a statement to HuffPost on Tuesday, adding that the president-elect believes the allegations are barred by the statute of limitations.