Lawyers for Donald Trump filed a salvo of legal arguments challenging the verdict in his "business fraud" case, as Letitia James fights to collect on the staggering half-billion-dollar judgment.
The aggressively political attorney general was blocked in a different case recently when a judge stopped her from targeting crisis pregnancy centers.
An oral argument is scheduled September 26 to consider Trump's appeal, as James defends a $464 million judgment in a case involving no victims.
New York judge Arthur Engoron found Trump liable for business fraud before the lengthy trial began, later slapping Trump with a $464 million judgment and a three-year ban on doing business in his home state.
AG James threatened to seize Trump's property if he did not pay, but he was able to post a reduced $175 million bond after the New York Appellate Court stepped in.
While the legal battle has faded from the headlines, Trump is still fighting to overturn Engoron's verdict, the severity of which shocked many in the business world who likened it to a "corporate death penalty."
In August, James quietly filed a brief before the Appellate Court insisting there was "overwhelming" evidence of Trump's guilt.
Trump's lawyers noted in their response last Friday that there were no victims of the supposed fraud, mentioning Trump's clients were "paid back in full."
“This case involves no victims, no complaints, no misstatements, no causation, and no injuries or losses," Trump lawyers Alina Habba and Clifford Robert wrote.
They slammed judge Engoron for undervaluing Mar-A-Lago "at $18 million to $27.6 million, disregarding unrebutted expert testimony that it is worth over $1.2 billion.”
The court told the New York Sun that a decision could take up to eight weeks, so an outcome is unlikely before the 2024 presidential election.
Trump has long ripped James' case as a political witch hunt, noting she campaigned for her office on going after him.
The far-left attorney general was rebuked by a Trump-appointed federal judge in a separate case recently for illegally targeting the free speech rights of crisis pregnancy centers.
James threatened to take action against the pregnancy centers for sharing "misleading" information about reversing the effects of the abortion pill. U.S. District Judge John Sinatra Jr. reminded James that even false speech is protected by the First Amendment.
“Plaintiffs are irreparably harmed each day that their First Amendment freedoms are infringed,” Sinatra wrote.
