Letitia James' $454 million judgment against Donald Trump is in danger of unraveling as a New York appeals court examines the "monstrously stretched" substance of the case, according to a legal expert.
Andrew McCarthy, a conservative pundit and former federal prosecutor, said Trump is likely to have his penalty reduced in the "unabashedly politicized" case.
Attorney general James has alleged the case is straightforward, arguing Trump defrauded the public by inflating his assets in his business dealings with high-level banks and insurers. But judges on a mid-level New York appeals court weren't so sure, with one calling the size of the judgment "troubling."
Trump, and others in the business world, have warned that James is setting a chilling precedent that will chase businesses out of New York, especially because there are no victims in the case.
In an article for the New York Post, McCarthy argued that James stretched a consumer protection statue beyond recognition in order to harass Trump. The law she used was "never meant to turn the AG into what James aspires to be: the uber-regulator of all business conducted in the Empire State," McCarthy asserted.
But James won the case with help from a compliant, partisan judge, Arthur Engoron, who found Trump liable before the trial even began and ordered him to pay $454 million.
"As night follows day, Engoron gave her what she wanted; in conjunction with interest charges that continue to compound, the staggering result is nearly $500 million — a corporate death penalty," McCarthy wrote.
While James stretched the law to get her corrupt outcome, the case rests on legal quicksand, McCarthy warned.
Indeed, a five-judge panel of New York's Appellate Division sounded skeptical of James' case last week, with some questioning if she stretched the law too far. The judges noted the sophistication of the financial actors Trump dealt with, suggesting James' consumer fraud case wasn't appropriate.
"Mostly, the judges worried aloud that the AG had overstepped her jurisdiction and had no business refereeing private transactions between sophisticated financial actors," McCarthy wrote.
McCarthy cautioned that a "sweeping" Trump victory is not in the bag, but "a significant reduction in the ludicrous penalty is very likely."
The same appeals court previously lowered Trump's gargantuan $454 million bond payment, which enabled him to freeze collection as James threatened to begin seizing Trump's assets.
