New York AG will continue to pursue $454 million civil fraud judgment against Trump
Nathan Laine/Bloomberg via Getty Images
(NEW YORK) — Donald Trump’s impending inauguration as the next president does not impact his $454 million civil fraud judgment, a lawyer for New York Attorney General Letitia James said in a letter to the president-elect’s lawyer Tuesday.
Trump and his adult sons liable owe approximately $490 million including interest in their civil fraud case after a judge ruled last year that they repeatedly inflated Trump’s net worth to secure better loan terms over a decade of business dealings. Trump has appealed the ruling.
Because presidents do not have immunity from civil litigation, James plans to continue defending her judgment against Trump during his appeal of the case, the letter said.
“The ordinary burdens of civil litigation do not impede the President’s official duties in a way that violates the U.S. Constitution,” New York Deputy Solicitor General Judith Vale wrote in a letter to D. John Sauer, Trump’s appellate lawyer and nominee for solicitor general.
Last month, Sauer requested that James drop her civil case against Trump to “cure” partisan divides and improve “the health of our Republic.”
“In the aftermath of his historic election victory, President Trump has called for our Nation’s partisan strife to end, and for the contending factions to join forces for the greater good of the country. This call for unity extends to the legal onslaught against him and his family that permeated the most recent election cycle,” Sauer wrote, citing the recent dismissal of Trump federal election interference and classified documents cases.
Vale rejected the request, saying in her letter that there is “no merit to your claim that the pendency of defendants’ own appeal will impede Mr. Trump’s official duties as President.”
Because the New York attorney general’s case is civil, James faces no restriction in continuing to pursue her case as Trump returns to the White House.
“Accordingly, the various actions taken by the Special Counsel’s office or the District Attorney’s Office of New York County in the respective criminal cases brought by those offices against Mr. Trump are irrelevant here,” Vale’s letter said.
A ruling on Trump’s appeal of the judgment could come at any time.
Katherine Faulders, Aaron Katersky and Peter Charalambous, ABC News
(NEW YORK) — Donald Trump’s lawyers are urging the New York judge in his criminal hush money case to throw out his conviction based on unsworn allegations of “grave juror misconduct” that prosecutors have described as vague and “seemingly inaccurate.”
While Trump’s lawyers argued the claims illustrate “the manifest unfairness of these proceedings,” Judge Juan Merchan criticized Trump’s lawyers for making claims consisting “entirely of unsworn allegations” and for opposing a hearing that would allow the allegations to be vetted.
“Allegations of juror misconduct should be thoroughly investigated. However, this Court is prohibited from deciding such claims on the basis of mere hearsay and conjecture,” wrote Merchan, largely rejecting the claims unless Trump’s attorneys provide sworn statements or consent to a hearing on the matter.
Trump’s claims were included in court filings unsealed on Monday, but the specific allegations were redacted.
Defense lawyers Todd Blanche and Emil Bove — who Trump last month nominated to top positions in the Department of Justice — claimed to have uncovered evidence of juror misconduct that calls into question what they call the “dubious validity of the highly suspect verdicts rendered by the jury.”
Trump was found guilty in May on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records related to a hush money payment made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels in order to boost his electoral prospects in the 2016 presidential election.
Judge Merchan has yet to sentence Trump, who has been seeking to have the case dismissed on the grounds of presidential immunity following his reelection last month.
Trump’s lawyers, citing presidential immunity and other ongoing litigation, told Merchan they oppose a hearing examining their claims of juror misconduct, and instead asked the judge to weigh the claims as he considers Trump’s pending motion to throw out the case.
“This behavior is completely unacceptable, and it demonstrates without question that the verdicts in this case are as unreliable as DA Bragg’s promise to protect Manhattanites from violent crime,” the defense lawyers said, referring to Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who brought the case.
Prosecutors argued in a filing that the jury misconduct claims are vague and untested, and that Trump’s lawyers declined to include a sworn declaration. They wrote that the alleged source of the claims directly told Trump’s lawyers that their summary of the allegations “contains inaccuracies and does not contain additional information that I never shared,” and that they declined to sign a sworn affidavit.
“Defendant cannot short-circuit this process by insisting that this Court treat his unsworn and seemingly inaccurate allegations of jury misconduct as true,” prosecutors said.
Prosecutors alleged that Trump’s lawyers are avoiding the proper mechanism to evaluate the claims by inserting them into the public domain while “opposing any endeavor to properly evaluate them.”
“Defendant does not want to participate in a hearing designed to evaluate these claims. He wants instead to use these unsworn, untested claims by his attorneys to undermine public confidence in the verdict,” their filing said.
Judge Merchan largely sided with prosecutors, declining to consider the claims unless Trump’s lawyers specifically move to vacate the verdict due to allegations of juror misconduct based on sworn allegations or evaluated through a hearing, which they so far have not done. Merchan still allowed both sides to docket their filings with significant redactions.
“This Court finds that to allow the public filing of the letter without redactions and without the benefit of a hearing, would only serve to undermine the integrity of these proceedings while simultaneously placing the safety of the jurors at grave risk,” Merchan wrote.
The exchange comes as the Merchan, on Monday, rejected Trump’s request to vacate the verdict in the case based on the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity decision.
Trump had sought to dismiss his criminal indictment and vacate the jury verdict on the grounds that prosecutors, during the trial earlier this year, introduced evidence relating to Trump’s official acts as president that was inadmissible based on the Supreme Court’s subsequent ruling that Trump is entitled to presumptive immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts undertaken while in office.
Merchan ruled that the evidence in the case related “entirely to unofficial conduct” and “poses no danger of intrusion on the authority and function of the Executive Branch.”
Faisal Bashir/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images
(ALBANY, N.Y.) — New York government employees are barred from downloading DeepSeek’s artificial intelligence application onto state devices due to security concerns, Gov. Kathy Hochul announced Monday.
The DeepSeek chatbot, known as R1, responds to user queries just like its U.S.-based counterparts, such as the popular ChatGPT. But the China-based DeepSeek has code hidden in its programming that has the built-in capability to send user data directly to the Chinese government, experts told ABC News.
“Public safety is my top priority,” Hochul said in a statement. “New York will continue fighting to combat cyber threats, ensure the privacy and safety of our data, and safeguard against state-sponsored censorship.”
Last year, Hochul issued guidance for the “responsible use of AI” in New York’s government to help improve operations while “protecting privacy, managing risk and promoting accountability, safety and equity,” according to the governor’s office.
Rep. Josh Gottheimer, D-N.J., who serves on the House Intelligence Committee, told ABC News he thinks DeepSeek should be banned “from all government devices immediately.”
“No one should be allowed to download it onto their device. And I think we have to inform the public,” he said.
Gottheimer and Darin LaHood, R-Ill., introduced a bipartisan bill to ban DeepSeek from all government devices last week.
“The Chinese Communist Party has made it abundantly clear that it will exploit any tool at its disposal to undermine our national security, spew harmful disinformation, and collect data on Americans. Now, we have deeply disturbing evidence that they are using DeepSeek to steal the sensitive data of U.S. citizens. This is a five alarm national security fire,” Gottheimer said in a statement.
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott banned DeepSeek on government devices, the first states to do so, on Jan. 31.
President Donald Trump was asked on Friday whether he believed DeepSeek was a national security threat, to which he replied, “No, I mean, I think it’s happening. It’s a technology that’s happening. … It’ll be a lot less expensive, the AI, we’re talking about, will be a lot less expensive that people originally thought. That’s a good thing. I view that as a very good development, not a bad development.”
(NEW YORK) — New York Judge Juan Merchan has delayed President-elect Donald Trump’s Nov. 26 sentencing date in his criminal hush money case, according to a brief order issued Friday.
The judge is allowing the defense to file a motion to dismiss the case, which he said is due by Dec. 2.
The judge provided no new sentencing date after adjourning the original Nov. 26 date.
Trump was scheduled to be sentenced next week after he was found guilty in May on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records related to a hush money payment made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels in order to boost his electoral prospects in the 2016 presidential election.
Judge Merchan’s order also puts off any decision about whether the Supreme Court’s recent presidential immunity decision applies to the case.
While the $130,000 payment to Daniels preceded Trump’s ascension to the presidency, Trump has claimed that prosecutors filled “glaring holes in their case” with evidence that related to official acts he subsequently performed in office — which the Supreme Court ruled are off limits in its July ruling on presidential immunity.
Prosecutors have argued that the case centers on “entirely personal” conduct with “no relationship whatsoever to any official duty of the presidency.”
Trump has asked that the verdict be overturned or the case be thrown out entirely. If Judge Merchan tosses the conviction, he could order a new trial — which would be delayed for at least four years until Trump leaves office — or dismiss the indictment altogether.
Trump’s conviction carries a penalty of up to four years in prison, though first-time offenders normally receive lesser sentences.
