“Nothing succeeds like excess for judges like Engoron”

The latest ruling in former President Donald Trump's civil fraud case was called “grossly unfair” by a legal analyst.

“That's the reason, and it's pretty obvious.”

(Video: Fox News)

New York Judge Arthur Engoron not only expected the former president to pay the more than $350 million in his judgment in the civil fraud trial, he expected it without delay. While the jurist dismissed the request after arguing that the lawyers “didn't explain, much less justify” their reasoning, George Washington University Law School professor Jonathan Turley rate the statement as “funny”.

“It was funny … the judge's quote, because the explanation is in the picture,” Turley told Fox News host Bill Hemmer on “America's Newsroom” Friday. “He just imposed a $355 million judgment under a law that has never been used in this way. That's the reason, and it's pretty obvious.”

How it had been reportedthe judge had succinctly responded to Trump's lawyer asking for a 30-day delay in the execution of the sentence by stating, “You have not explained, let alone justified, any basis for a stay. I am sure that the Appellate Division will protect your appeal rights.”

Continuing his tear against the justice system in the Empire State, Turley also took aim at New York Attorney General Letitia James, whose actions appeared to support the idea of ​​a political prosecution of Trump aimed at undo your business successes.

“But there are also people like James, who have never built anything but their political careers, who now treat these buildings as if they were theirs,” the Fox News contributor said Friday. “I mean, he said he's looking at a couple of properties that he might want to seize, like this is a fire sale.”

“And the fact is that the judge showed absolutely no sense of fairness in all of this … his decision is the decision of a single jurist and this party wants to have a review. But to do that, he has to 'bring what's roughly half a million dollars. And that has a huge unfairness when you combine the use of the law and the size of their judgment and then that requirement for a deposit,' Turley continued. “But, he simply brushed them aside and his tone almost bordered on mockery.”

In addition to his on-air remarks, the legal scholar had expanded on his position on his own blog where he he wrote“Under New York law, Trump cannot appeal this ruling without depositing the full amount, including interest, into a court account. Even for Trump, $455 million is hard to come by. From the similarly, a bond would require a company to guarantee the payment of a defendant who has been banned from doing business in New York and faces the need to liquidate much of his portfolio.”

“Nothing succeeds like excess for judges like Engoron,” added Turley. “By imposing this astronomical figure, it can make it difficult or difficult for a defendant to appeal, without filing for bankruptcy or selling assets at distressed prices.”

Staff writer

A native of Brooklyn, NY, Kevin Haggerty is a graduate of Hunter College, where he studied Cultural Anthropology and Geography. An avid reader and seeker of truth, he currently resides in Texas with his wife and dog, and when he's not researching current events and their impacts, you'll find him spending time with friends and family or working on his next novel ·the.

Latest messages from Kevin Haggerty (see everything)

We have zero tolerance for comments that contain violence, racism, profanity, profanity, doxing, or rude behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it, click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for engaging with us in a fruitful conversation.