New York court tosses Trump's $500M fraud fine

A divided appeals court threw out a hefty penalty against President Trump for fraudulently inflating his wealth

TOPSHOT - Former US President Donald Trump departs after speaking to the press after attending the civil fraud trial against the Trump Organization in New York State Supreme Court, in New York City on January 11, 2024. Donald Trump ignored warnings from the judge in his New York civil fraud trial Thursday and turned closing arguments into an election campaign attack, claiming that prosecutors are out to stop his political comeback.
Trump thanked the judges for having the 'courage to throw out this unlawful and disgraceful decision'
(Image credit: John Lamparski / AFP / Getty Images)

What happened

A fractured New York state appellate court Thursday threw out the roughly $500 million penalty levied on President Donald Trump last year for fraudulently inflating his wealth and property values to obtain favorable loans. Trump claimed a "total victory," but the judges upheld the lower court's fraud judgment and limits on the ability of Trump and his company to conduct business.

Who said what

Trump did harm in inflating his assets, but "it was not the cataclysmic harm that can justify a nearly half-billion-dollar award," Justice Peter Moulton said in one of the three opinions from the five-judge panel. The jumble of rulings marked a "financial victory" and a "measure of legal validation" for Trump, The New York Times said, as well as a "remarkable turn" in his "battle" against New York Attorney General Letitia James, one of Trump's "foremost adversaries and a target of his wide-ranging retribution campaign."

Trump thanked the judges on social media for having the "courage to throw out this unlawful and disgraceful decision." James said that "yet another court has ruled that the president violated the law" and "affirmed the well-supported finding" that Trump is "liable for fraud" and "our case has merit."

What next?

James said she would appeal the ruling. The fact that the "sharply splintered" appellate panel could only get majority agreement that James acted within her authority "all but ensures New York's top court will have to get involved," The Wall Street Journal said.

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE
https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/flexiimages/jacafc5zvs1692883516.jpg

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up
Explore More
Rafi Schwartz, The Week US

Rafi Schwartz has worked as a politics writer at The Week since 2022, where he covers elections, Congress and the White House. He was previously a contributing writer with Mic focusing largely on politics, a senior writer with Splinter News, a staff writer for Fusion's news lab, and the managing editor of Heeb Magazine, a Jewish life and culture publication. Rafi's work has appeared in Rolling Stone, GOOD and The Forward, among others.