Appeals Court Casts Doubt on Trump's Civil Fraud Case
Submitted by MAGA
Posted 4 hours ago
**Unjustified Penalties: Appeals Court Questions Trump Fraud Judgment in New York**
In a pivotal hearing, a New York appeals court expressed significant skepticism regarding the $454 million civil fraud judgment levied against former President Donald Trump.
The questioning from a five-judge panel raised critical concerns about the legitimacy of the allegations brought forth by New York Attorney General Letitia James.
During the oral argument, the judges scrutinized the enormity of the financial penalties and the justification for prosecuting Trump under a consumer fraud statute focused on private transactions between sophisticated parties.
Justice Peter Moulton articulated the perplexity surrounding the hefty penalty, asking, “How do you tether the amount that was assessed by the Supreme Court to the harm that was caused here where the parties left these transactions happy?”
This sentiment was echoed by Justice David Friedman, who questioned whether the attorney general had overstepped her boundaries. He noted that there appeared to be no evidence of financial harm suffered by any party involved.
Trump's attorney, D. John Sauer, contended that the suit should be dismissed, citing a violation of the statute of limitations and arguing that the case lacked any true victims. He maintained that the financial discrepancies at the center of the lawsuit did not impact Trump's ability to secure loans.
In his defense, Sauer remarked, “We have a situation where there were no victims, no complaints. How is there a capacity or tendency to deceive when you have these clear disclaimers?”
These challenging inquiries from the judges underscore a growing doubt regarding Attorney General James's authority in pursuing cases involving private business dealings that do not involve consumer harm.
The outcome of this appeal could have major implications not just for Trump, but for the landscape of legal accountability in highly contested political environments.
As Trump continues to campaign for the presidency, this legal battle intertwines with his efforts to regain office, showcasing a complex intersection of politics and law.
The judges did not issue a ruling at the conclusion of the hearing, leaving the future of the judgment uncertain as Trump navigates these turbulent legal waters.
Sources:
lite.cnn.com
thegatewaypundit.com
trendingpoliticsnews.com
In a pivotal hearing, a New York appeals court expressed significant skepticism regarding the $454 million civil fraud judgment levied against former President Donald Trump.
The questioning from a five-judge panel raised critical concerns about the legitimacy of the allegations brought forth by New York Attorney General Letitia James.
During the oral argument, the judges scrutinized the enormity of the financial penalties and the justification for prosecuting Trump under a consumer fraud statute focused on private transactions between sophisticated parties.
Justice Peter Moulton articulated the perplexity surrounding the hefty penalty, asking, “How do you tether the amount that was assessed by the Supreme Court to the harm that was caused here where the parties left these transactions happy?”
This sentiment was echoed by Justice David Friedman, who questioned whether the attorney general had overstepped her boundaries. He noted that there appeared to be no evidence of financial harm suffered by any party involved.
Trump's attorney, D. John Sauer, contended that the suit should be dismissed, citing a violation of the statute of limitations and arguing that the case lacked any true victims. He maintained that the financial discrepancies at the center of the lawsuit did not impact Trump's ability to secure loans.
In his defense, Sauer remarked, “We have a situation where there were no victims, no complaints. How is there a capacity or tendency to deceive when you have these clear disclaimers?”
These challenging inquiries from the judges underscore a growing doubt regarding Attorney General James's authority in pursuing cases involving private business dealings that do not involve consumer harm.
The outcome of this appeal could have major implications not just for Trump, but for the landscape of legal accountability in highly contested political environments.
As Trump continues to campaign for the presidency, this legal battle intertwines with his efforts to regain office, showcasing a complex intersection of politics and law.
The judges did not issue a ruling at the conclusion of the hearing, leaving the future of the judgment uncertain as Trump navigates these turbulent legal waters.
Sources:
lite.cnn.com
thegatewaypundit.com
trendingpoliticsnews.com
Latest News