Who won the Trump civil fraud appellate court ruling (Fact check)
And an explosive CDPAP hearing has lawmakers irate with several questions unanswered.
Good afternoon — it’s Thursday and Senior Citizens Day.
In today’s CapCon:
A split New York appellate court decision in New York Attorney General Letitia James’ case against President Donald J. Trump has both sides claiming victory.
Here’s what the ruling actually says, what the judges wrote and who won.
Several questions remain unanswered to the frustration of lawmakers after testimony was heard at a long-awaited CDPAP hearing.
Shootings are down in GIVE communities this year, Hochul’s office says.
New York is looking to renew nuclear energy incentives.
Names in today’s CapCon: Donald J. Trump, Letitia James, Michael Cohen, Dianne Renwick, Arthur Engoron, James McDonald, Gustavo Rivera, Peter Moulton, John R. Higgitt, Llinét M. Rosado, David Friedman, Kathy Hochul
⚖️ Explainer: What’s in the Trump civil fraud appellate ruling and who won
There seems to be some confusion about an appellate court ruling Thursday in the civil fraud case New York Attorney General Letitia James brought against President Donald J. Trump.
Trump’s supporters heralded the decision as a victory. His opponents framed it as validation of the trial court judge’s ruling against him.
They’re both right. They’re also both wrong. This is why you subscribe to CapCon.
The decision — which includes two concurring opinions and one dissent totaling 323 pages — may not be the final word. James said Thursday she’ll seek an appeal to the Court of Appeals, the state’s highest court.
“TOTAL VICTORY in the FAKE New York State Attorney General Letitia James Case!” Trump wrote on Truth Social.
“The First Department today affirmed the well-supported finding of the trial court: Donald Trump, his company, and two of his children are liable for fraud,” James said in a statement.
Let’s review what the judges wrote, what it means and how it compares to what’s been said since it was issued.
🖊️ A quick recap of New York v. Trump, et al.
The case was brought by James against Trump, his three eldest children and a few of his business associates in 2022. The probe began after James first took office in 2019.
James accused them of inflating the value of the Trump Organization’s assets to secure more favorable financing from lenders. That’s Trump’s company, which I’m assuming you figured out.
The trial began in October 2023. A lot had happened in the meantime but that’s more than you need to know to understand the decision handed down Thursday.
It was an explosive trial with testimony from well-known names, including Donald Trump Jr. and Michael Cohen, the elder Trump’s former personal attorney. Gag orders were issued. Swatting threats were made. It was a lot.
State Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron issued a ruling in mid-February. He ruled in favor of James, finding that Trump, his children and his company had used false financial information to secure better rates from lenders and borrow more.
Engoron ordered that Trump and his companies pay $454 million as a result of his ruling. Trump appealed to the Appellate Division First Department, which issued Thursday’s ruling.
🗣️ What the court wrote in its decision Thursday
There were five justices on the case, including Justice Dianne T. Renwick, the presiding justice of the First Department.
Renwick wrote the deciding opinion but it wasn’t supported by a majority of the court’s five judges at first. One other justice, Peter H. Moulton, joined her on it.
Two other justices — John R. Higgitt and Llinét M. Rosado — signed on to a different opinion that conflicted in part with Renwick. But they decided to ultimately support Renwick’s opinion to avoid a stalemate and allow for an appeal.
The final justice — David Friedman — wrote a dissent to the majority opinions. Friedman, to get that out of the way, wrote that he would’ve tossed the case altogether and argued that James didn’t have the legal authority to bring it at all.
I’ll focus on Renwick’s opinion since that’s the controlling decision.
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Capitol Confidential with Dan Clark to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.