T4K3.news
Appeals court voids big civil penalty against Trump
New York's appellate court voids the nearly $355 million civil penalty in the Trump fraud case, while keeping fraud findings on the record and leaving room for further appeals.
The New York Appellate Division voids the nearly $355 million civil penalty but keeps fraud findings, signaling a long legal battle ahead.
Appeals court voids massive civil fraud penalty against Trump
The New York Appellate Division on Thursday voided the nearly $355 million civil penalty Judge Arthur Engoron ordered Trump to pay after finding he inflated his wealth on financial statements used by lenders and insurers. The panel ruled the disgorgement amount was excessive and violated the Eighth Amendment, but it left in place other sanctions and allowed for potential further appeals to the Court of Appeals. Trump had posted a bond and paused collection, keeping the financial hit from landing while the case winds through higher courts.
The ruling was split, with opinions forming a mosaic rather than a single majority. While some judges affirmed parts of the fraud finding, others criticized the use of the penalty itself and questioned the scope of the attorney general’s suit. The decision underscores how the case sits at the crossroads of law and politics, and how a lengthy legal battle can unfold even as other legal challenges press on in parallel.
Key Takeaways
"While the injunctive relief ordered by the court is well crafted to curb defendants' business culture, the court's disgorgement order, which directs that defendants pay nearly half a billion dollars to the State of New York, is an excessive fine that violates the Eighth Amendment."
Judge Renwick and Judge Moulton outline why the penalty was struck as excessive.
"Plainly, her ultimate goal was not 'market hygiene' but political hygiene, ending with the derailment of President Trump's political career and the destruction of his real estate business."
Judge Friedman critiques the motivations behind the suit.
"The voters have obviously rendered a verdict on his political career. This bench today unanimously derails the effort to destroy his business."
Judge Friedman on the political weight of the case.
This decision highlights the tension between aggressive civil remedies and constitutional limits. By striking down the financial sanction while preserving some findings, the court signals that accountability can be pursued without guaranteeing an outsized punishment. The split opinions reflect broader unease about how such lawsuits are brought and the potential political stakes involved. For Trump, the ruling buys time and keeps leverage in dispute resolution, even as other cases move forward and as he campaigns. For lenders and investors, the ruling complicates the risk calculus around Trump’s business disclosures and financing. The long, multi-judge debate also raises questions about how future civil cases should be framed and defended in state court.
Highlights
- The legal road travels on and the case moves to higher courts
- Law and politics now share a courtroom in New York
- The penalty is paused, not the argument about accountability
- Money and power bend under the weight of the law
Political and legal sensitivity imminent
The ruling sits at the intersection of law and politics. It could provoke political backlash, influence public perception of accountability, and affect investors or lenders watching Trump’s financial disclosures and business dealings.
The courtroom will keep writing the next chapter.
Enjoyed this? Let your friends know!
Related News
Trump wins partial ruling on civil fraud case
Appeals court voids Trump penalty
New York Court Reverses Trump Civil Fraud Penalty
Trump wins major fraud penalty ruling
Trump penalty overturned by New York appeals court
Trump wins partial relief in NY fraud case
Bolton FBI raid tests line
Caremark faces 290 million penalty in Medicare fraud ruling
