In a notable ruling, the New York Supreme Court's Appellate Division dismissed the financial penalty of over $500 million that the trial court had imposed on Donald Trump in connection with a civil fraud trial held last year. This hefty fine was initially ordered by Judge Arthur Engoron, who had determined that Trump significantly inflated the value of his properties under the Trump Organization to obtain favorable loans.
Though the court reaffirmed Trump's liability for fraudulent activities, it stated that the imposed fine constituted a breach of constitutional rights against disproportionate penalties. Judge Peter Moulton highlighted that the harm caused did not warrant such an extraordinary financial penalty, noting that it was not the kind of "cataclysmic harm" that could justify a near half-billion-dollar award.
Trump responded on his social media platform, touting the ruling as a "total victory" and viewing the decision as an indictment of the legal proceedings he has characterized as politically driven. He praised the court for overturning what he described as an unjust verdict that negatively impacted businesses across New York State.
Conversely, the New York Attorney General's Office, which initiated the fraud case, framed the court's decision positively since Trump's culpability was still recognized. They intend to appeal the ruling, aiming for a reconsideration of the now-voided financial penalties. The office reiterated that the case's foundation remains intact, affirming Trump's fraudulent actions and those of his company and two adult sons.
The appellate ruling maintained some previous non-monetary penalties, originally imposed by Judge Engoron, including barring Trump from serving as a corporate director and obtaining loans from banks within the state for three years. The ruling, spanning 323 pages, revealed splits among the five judges regarding the merits of the initial lawsuit.Energy among the judges varied, with some supporting the Attorney General’s right to bring the lawsuit, though a few preferred a limited retread of the case.
Judge Moulton stressed that the electorate had already made a political decision concerning Trump's public career and indicated that the judicial system has played a role in curbing his business endeavors. He clarified that the excessive fine contradicted the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which restricts severe punishments.
The ruling arrives almost a year after oral arguments were presented and comes amid sustained skepticism among judges towards the civil fraud claims. Eric Trump, Donald Trump’s son, claimed victory for their family in the aftermath of the decision, expressing relief after a protracted five-year ordeal.
In September 2023, Judge Engoron had previously ruled against Trump, establishing that he misrepresented his net worth by significant margins—pointing out instances of exaggerated claims about the size of his Trump Tower penthouse. Trump's arguments against the case have persisted, portraying it as a partisan attack facilitated by Democratic Attorney General Letitia James.
Though the court reaffirmed Trump's liability for fraudulent activities, it stated that the imposed fine constituted a breach of constitutional rights against disproportionate penalties. Judge Peter Moulton highlighted that the harm caused did not warrant such an extraordinary financial penalty, noting that it was not the kind of "cataclysmic harm" that could justify a near half-billion-dollar award.
Trump responded on his social media platform, touting the ruling as a "total victory" and viewing the decision as an indictment of the legal proceedings he has characterized as politically driven. He praised the court for overturning what he described as an unjust verdict that negatively impacted businesses across New York State.
Conversely, the New York Attorney General's Office, which initiated the fraud case, framed the court's decision positively since Trump's culpability was still recognized. They intend to appeal the ruling, aiming for a reconsideration of the now-voided financial penalties. The office reiterated that the case's foundation remains intact, affirming Trump's fraudulent actions and those of his company and two adult sons.
The appellate ruling maintained some previous non-monetary penalties, originally imposed by Judge Engoron, including barring Trump from serving as a corporate director and obtaining loans from banks within the state for three years. The ruling, spanning 323 pages, revealed splits among the five judges regarding the merits of the initial lawsuit.Energy among the judges varied, with some supporting the Attorney General’s right to bring the lawsuit, though a few preferred a limited retread of the case.
Judge Moulton stressed that the electorate had already made a political decision concerning Trump's public career and indicated that the judicial system has played a role in curbing his business endeavors. He clarified that the excessive fine contradicted the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which restricts severe punishments.
The ruling arrives almost a year after oral arguments were presented and comes amid sustained skepticism among judges towards the civil fraud claims. Eric Trump, Donald Trump’s son, claimed victory for their family in the aftermath of the decision, expressing relief after a protracted five-year ordeal.
In September 2023, Judge Engoron had previously ruled against Trump, establishing that he misrepresented his net worth by significant margins—pointing out instances of exaggerated claims about the size of his Trump Tower penthouse. Trump's arguments against the case have persisted, portraying it as a partisan attack facilitated by Democratic Attorney General Letitia James.
