
Court throws out ‘excessive’ civil fraud penalty against Donald Trump
Last year, a judge ordered Mr Trump to pay $355 million, which rose to $515 million with interest, after he ruled the now-President had engaged in fraud by padding financial statements that were sent to lenders and insurers.
A panel of five judges ruled on Thursday that the penalty levelled at Mr Trump was “excessive” and violated the Eighth Amendment – although the decision was not unanimous.
The Eighth Amendment prohibits ‘excessive fines’ and ‘cruel and unusual punishments’.
Judges Dianne T Renwick and Peter H Moulton wrote in statements that shaped the ruling: “While the injunctive relief ordered by the court is well crafted to curb defendants’ business culture, the court’s disgorgement order, which directs that defendants pay nearly half a billion dollars to the State of New York, is an excessive fine that violates the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution.”
Read more: Trump suggests Ukraine has ‘no chance of winning’ war unless it attacks Russia
Read more: Trump administration to screen social media accounts of visa applicants for anti-American views
Other executives at the Trump Organisation, which includes Trump’s sons Eric and Donald Jr, also faced fines, bringing the total, including interest, up to $527 million.
Mr Trump took to social media following the ruling to describe it as a “great win for America” and called the judges involved in the initial case “political hacks”.
He said: “These were all Political Trials in an effort to destroy my viability as a Presidential Candidate before, during, and after the Election.
“They were strongly coordinated with the Biden/Harris Campaign, and will go down in History as among the most Corrupt Cases ever brought.
“This was an attack by the Biden/Harris Administration on their Political Opponent, ME. It is such an Honor to have withstood it, thrived, and even become President of the United States despite the horrible things that were done to me.”
Thursday’s ruling has also left room for appeal to the state’s highest court.
No Comment! Be the first one.