A New York Court Questioned If Trump Was Correctly Nailed For Bank Fraud

The state appeals court is evaluating whether Letitia James went too far in the case that has Trump facing a half-billion-dollar judgment.

Donald Trump Letitia James
Donald Trump was found liable for bank fraud in a civil case brought forward by New York Attorney General Letitia James. Dave Sanders/AP

As Donald Trump’s lawyers tried on Thursday to overturn the gargantuan half-billion-dollar bank fraud judgment, New York appellate judges wondered aloud whether the state’s attorney general went too far in scrutinizing the billionaire’s private dealings with Wall Street.

The five-justice panel showed mixed reactions, with at least one jurist who has repeatedly sided with Trump indicating that he is inclined to do so again. Their joint decision is expected in a little over a month — precarious timing with the presidential election just six weeks away.

“Identify any previous case where AG sued under 63-12 to upset a prior business transaction that was legally sophisticated,” Associate Justice David Friedman asked deputy solicitor general Judith N. Vale. Friedman cited an argument Trump’s team has often used, which is that the former president couldn’t possibly have tricked banks who had “conducted their own due diligence.”