Former President Donald Trump’s legal team has been pushing to remove Judge Arthur Engoron from the New York civil fraud trial after a development in the case revealed that he had engaged in “prohibited communications” with an external party amid the prosecution.
On Thursday, Trump’s attorneys filed documents seeking to have Engoron pulled from the case as the former president sought to appeal the highly controversial ruling that ordered Trump to pay roughly $464 million to the state of New York.
Per the court documents, Trump’s legal team cited an interview where real estate lawyer Adam Bailey claimed he spoke with Judge Engoron while the trial was ongoing at the courthouse. “I actually had the ability to speak to him three weeks ago,” Bailey said during a February interview. “I saw him in the corner [at the courthouse] and I told my client, ‘I need to go.’ And I walked over and we started talking … I wanted him to know what I think and why…I really want him to get it right.”
According to the former president’s legal team, the allegations were “fundamentally incompatible with the responsibilities attendant to donning the black robe and sitting in judgment.” The lawyers further illustrated how the “prohibited communications” are in “clear violation” of the court’s oath.
They stated, “Specifically, this Court has been publicly accused of engaging in prohibited communications regarding the merits of this case, in clear violation of the Code and this Court’s solemn oath. In sum, this Court appears to have proceeded not only in contravention of controlling law and the Constitution, but perhaps also contrary to the governing standards of judicial conduct. The gravity of these public allegations of potential misconduct is underscored by the fact that this Court, based upon public reporting, is also now apparently under investigation by the Commission on Judicial Conduct (the ‘Commission’).”
The ruling in the civil fraud case has been highly controversial, drawing criticism from legal experts. The American Tribune reported on comments from George Washington University Law Professor Jonathan Turley who blasted the decision from Judge Engoron.
“If the court was really concerned about whether Trump would be honest in future dealings, they could have just imposed a monitor,” Turley stated. “Instead he imposes this ridiculous amount of penalty on Trump. He could have picked any figure because none of us could make sense out of this. He could have said a trillion dollars and he just sits back and watches the defendant scramble to have to sell off properties in order to protect properties. And, you know, this is going to eventually have to go to some judge who is going to say enough. I mean, this really shocks the conscience.”
"*" indicates required fields
Turley echoed a common sentiment toward the ruling against the former president, explaining how it could severely damage the historically sound legal infrastructure in New York that has made it one of the biggest global hubs for business and finance. “This was one of the premier systems in the world for businesses and now people are fleeing New York. They see what’s happening here. And, you know, this is a judge who could have resolved this. He could have come up with an easy solution,” he continued.