On Thursday, a Manhattan judge dismissed claims of election interference from Trump's defense team, scheduling a criminal trial in the "hush money" case during the primary season on March 25. This marks the first time in American history that a former president will face trial in Manhattan.
The following day, a neighboring court ordered Trump and his companies to pay at least $355 million for persistent fraud, stemming from significant overvaluation of his real estate holdings. This development undermines the carefully crafted image of Trump as a shrewd investor.
These twin decisions have shifted the momentum against Trump. While he basked in short-lived legal victories last week, the U.S. Supreme Court appeared poised to dismiss an attempt to exclude him from the ballot in November. Additionally, a special counsel issued a politically damaging report on the acumen of his 81-year-old rival, Joe Biden.
Both financially and politically, these rulings add pressure to the former president as he gears up for a fiercely contested and costly general election. They also highlight the limitations of Trump's preferred legal strategy—employing every possible delay tactic, including filing appeals at each stage and leveraging pending cases against one another—to complicate the timing of potential trials.
In 2022, New York State’s principal legal officer, Letitia James, made a strategic decision to pursue civil fraud charges against Donald Trump rather than pursuing a criminal case related to alleged financial document manipulation. This choice allowed her to present the case against the former president and his organizations before a single judge, rather than a jury. Additionally, the burden of proof in civil matters is lower than in criminal cases.
Meanwhile, across the street, Manhattan’s lead prosecutor, Alvin Bragg, continued his criminal indictment of Trump regarding the payments allegedly made to buy the silence of adult film actress Stormy Daniels during the 2016 election. Despite Trump’s unsuccessful attempt to move the case to federal court, New York state regulations provide few opportunities for respondents to delay proceedings before a judgment is rendered.
Of the four pending criminal cases against Trump, Bragg’s case will proceed first, effectively taking the 77-year-old off the political battleground and into a gritty Manhattan courtroom four days a week.
Interestingly, the 92-page civil ruling, which Bragg has vowed to pursue, may prove to be even more damaging to Trump than a criminal conviction. Catherine Christian, a former Manhattan prosecutor with experience in financial fraud investigations, asserts that this civil decision carries significant weight and consequences for the former president.
In addition to the monetary penalties, the judge ordered that Donald Trump be banned from conducting any New York business for a significant duration. This means he cannot hold any executive position within the Trump Organization. Furthermore, Trump and his organizations are restricted from obtaining loans from financial institutions registered with the state controller, which includes nearly all major banks.
Joshua Naftalis, a former federal prosecutor in Manhattan, emphasized the devastating impact this ruling could have on Trump. It not only restricts his access to capital but also affects his ability, as well as that of his children, to operate their business ventures. The Trump Organization, which oversees Trump's hotels, office buildings, and golf courses, has consistently relied on borrowing for expansion, and this restriction will pose challenges for obtaining further credit.
While Trump managed to avoid the most severe outcome in the civil fraud case—namely, the "corporate death penalty" of dissolving his existing companies, which would have forced a fire sale of valuable assets like the Trump Tower in Midtown Manhattan—the damages are still accumulating. Even for a billionaire, the financial repercussions are significant. If Trump loses the expected appeals, he may need to sell one of his prized assets to satisfy the judgment. Notably, he is already obligated to pay $88 million to E. Jean Carroll after two separate Manhattan juries found him liable for slandering her by denying allegations of physical assault during the 1990s.
While Trump continues to grapple with legal battles on his home turf, his other criminal cases—related to alleged election interference and mishandling of classified records—are proceeding at a slower pace in Washington and Miami, respectively.
These legal cases, however, delve into his conduct before assuming office—a topic that often divides along partisan lines in a deeply polarized America. The New York cases, in particular, focus on “how [Trump] conducted himself prior to becoming president,” according to Joshua Naftalis. During that time, he could freely engage in business dealings and employ tactics like falsehoods and hush payments.
Shortly after the judgment on Friday, Trump addressed reporters from the opulent steps of his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida, where he has resided since 2019. There, he criticized “a biased New York state judge” who recently ruled that he must pay a fine “for having built a perfect company.” If his appeal is unsuccessful, he warned, “New York state will be no more"