In a significant development that could reshape his business landscape, President Donald Trump now risks losing key properties over a bond dispute in his ongoing civil “fraud” case.
New York’s Democrat Attorney General Letitia James could seize some of Trump’s assets if he does not secure a $464 million bond.
Such action marks a pivotal moment in the legal battle against the former President, Newsweek reported.
On Thursday, James took the initial step to seize Trump’s assets after his attorney said he was unable to secure a bond to appeal the massive judgment in the NYC “fraud” case.
James filed judgments in Westchester County where Trump’s private estate and golf course is located.
The saga began with allegations of civil “fraud” leveled against Trump and his company by AG James.
The case centers around accusations that Trump inflated the values of his assets on financial statements, a move that radical Judge Arthur Engoron last month deemed fraudulent.
In response, Engoron ordered Trump to pay an unprecedented hefty fine.
In a recent development, Trump’s lawyers have declared in a court document that obtaining the required $464 million bond is beyond their capacity.
This bond, an increase from an initial $454 million due to interest, is crucial for Trump if he wishes to appeal Judge Engoron’s decision.
Without it, the risk of property seizure looms large.
Trump’s legal team has been candid about the challenges they face, stating the difficulty in securing a bond of this magnitude.
They have scoured the market without success, highlighting the unique challenge of finding a bonding company willing to cover such a significant amount.
This situation places Trump in a precarious position as the March 25 deadline to provide the bond amount approaches rapidly.
The properties at risk include some of Trump’s most prized assets, such as Trump Park Avenue, Trump Tower, and several Trump National Golf Clubs.
The potential seizure of these properties by James would not only represent a significant financial blow to Trump but also a symbolic one, affecting his standing in the New York business community and beyond.
Trump has publicly criticized the judgment through his Truth Social account, framing the bond requirement as an infringement on his appellate rights.
He argues that the necessity to possibly sell properties at “fire sale” prices to cover the bond would be unjust, especially if his appeal were successful.
Trump is calling the situation a “witch hunt” and “election interference.”
The escalation from a $454 million to a $464 million bond due to accrued interest adds another layer of complexity to Trump’s predicament.
His legal team’s statement underscores the monumental task of securing a bond for such an amount, describing it as a “practical impossibility under the circumstances presented.”
Judge Engoron’s ruling not only imposed a financial penalty on Trump but also carried significant operational repercussions.
The judgment bars Donald Trump and his two eldest sons, Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr., from conducting business in New York for a period of two to three years, further complicating the Trump Organization’s ability to operate within one of its most crucial markets.
This case is emblematic of the legal challenges that have pursued Trump since leaving office.
As the March 25 deadline approaches, the stakes could not be higher for Trump.
The inability to secure the bond not only threatens his property portfolio but also his capacity to challenge the court’s decision.
This case has far-reaching implications, not just for Trump but for the broader legal and business landscapes.
The potential seizure of Trump’s properties by James’s office would mark an unprecedented move in the history of legal actions against former presidents.
Such a development would not only have significant financial implications for Trump but also pose a stark reminder of the legal vulnerabilities that high-profile individuals can face, regardless of their status or position.
Trump’s assertion that he might need to sell properties to meet the bond requirement reflects the gravity of the situation.
The prospect of liquidating assets under duress could have lasting implications on his business empire, impacting not only its financial health but also its reputation and influence.
In conclusion, Trump’s struggle to secure a $464 million bond in his civil “fraud” case represents a critical juncture.
With properties like Trump Park Avenue, Trump Tower, and several golf clubs at risk, the outcome of this legal battle could have lasting implications for Trump’s business empire and legacy.
Trump’s legal team has highlighted the practical impossibility of securing such a large bond, the size of which has never been issued against an individual or private company.
On Thursday, Trump’s attorneys sent a letter to the Appellate Division of New York’s Supreme Court and asserted James’s actions are “unconstitutional.”
“It would be completely illogical — and the definition of an unconstitutional Excessive Fine and a Taking — to require Defendants to sell properties at all, and especially in a ‘fire sale,’ in order to be able to appeal the lawless Supreme Court judgment, as that would cause harm that cannot be repaired once the Defendants do win, as is overwhelmingly likely, on appeal,” Trump’s attorney Cliff Robert wrote.
Trump’s attorney also said James’s demand that Trump pay the judgment in full in order to appeal is “unreasonable, unjust, and unconstitutional (under both the Federal and New York State Constitutions) bond condition, which would cause irreparable harm and foreclose any review of Supreme Court’s deeply flawed decision in this case.”
The 45th president himself has lambasted the judgment as an attack on his rights and an example of political witch-hunting.
As the March 25 deadline looms, the world watches.
