Former President Trump must answer questions under oath in the New York Attorney General’s civil investigation into his business practices, the state appeals court ruled on Thursday, rejecting his argument to be acquitted because his answers could be used in a parallel criminal investigation.
A panel of four judges in the appeals department of the state first instance court confirmed the verdict of Judge Arthur Engoron from February 17, which imposed court summons demanding that Trump and his two oldest children - Ivanka and Donald Jr. - testify in the Atti case. Investigation of General Leticia James.
“The existence of a criminal investigation does not preclude civil disclosure of related facts, in which a party may exercise the privilege against self-incrimination,” the appeals chamber wrote, citing the 5th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and other legal witness protection.
Trump’s lawyers agreed in March that they would make statements within 14 days of the Appeals Chamber’s decision upholding Engoron’s verdict. They could also appeal the decision to the highest state court, the Court of Appeals, postponing the case and the potential testimony of the Trump family indefinitely.
Trump’s lawyers were left with a message asking for comment.
James praised the verdict, which came just two weeks after the appeals chamber heard oral arguments in the case. She wrote on Twitter that her investigation will continue “unhindered because no one is above the law.”
“The courts have once again ruled that Donald Trump must abide by our laws investigating his financial affairs,” James said in a statement. “We will continue to follow the facts of this case and ensure that no one can evade the law.”
James said that her investigation revealed evidence that Trump’s company, Trump’s organization, used “fraudulent or misleading” assessments of assets such as golf courses and skyscrapers to obtain loans and tax breaks. Ivanka and Donald Trump Jr. were both executive directors in Trump’s organization and among his father’s most trusted allies.
In its verdict, the Appeals Chamber described the investigation as focusing on whether Trump “committed persistent fraud in his financial practices and disclosure.”
Trump, a Republican, denies the accusations and says that James’ investigation is part of a politically motivated “witch hunt”.
In an appeal against Engoron’s summons, his lawyers claimed that James, a Democrat, had participated in “selective prosecution”. The Appeals Chamber rejected that, saying that the investigation was on a solid legal basis and that Trump did not show evidence that he or their company was “treated differently” than other companies under similar control.
The Trump’s lawyer, Alan Futerfas, told the Appeals Chamber in oral arguments on May 11 that James seems to be using civil court summons to circumvent New York law that requires immunity for people who testify before a grand jury.
Judith Vale, who represented James’ office, retorted that there was enough evidence from the civil investigation to support the court summons for Trump’s testimony.
She also cited the legal precedent that allowed the Attorney General’s Office to do so, and said that Trump can always invoke his right to the 5th Amendment against self-blame - as Trump’s son Eric did hundreds of times in a 2020 statement.
Judge of the Court of Appeals Rolando T. Acosta agrees with that view, which hinted at the verdict from Thursday while questioning Futerfas from the bench.
Everything that Trump says in his civil statement in the James investigation could be used against him in the criminal investigation supervised by the Manhattan Dist. Atti. Alvin Bragg.
Last summer, spurred on by evidence uncovered by James’ office, the prosecutor’s office accused Trump’s organization and its longtime chief financial officer, Alain Weiselberg, of tax fraud, saying he had collected more than $ 1.7 million in off-book compensation. Weisselberg and company have pleaded not guilty.
Thursday’s decision by the Court of Appeals was the latest in a flurry of legal activities involving Trump and the chief prosecutor’s investigation in recent weeks.
Last week, Trump paid $ 110,000 in fines and met several other conditions as he tried to end a contempt of court order issued by Engoron on April 25 after he slowly responded to another call from James seeking documents and other evidence.
James’ office said Monday that it had summoned Trump’s longtime executive aide, Ron Graf, and planned to question her under oath next week in the investigation.
Meanwhile, a federal judge in New York is expected to soon decide on the lawsuit that Trump filed against James in December in an attempt to suspend her investigation. Trump’s lawyers are asking for a ban on stopping the investigation. James’ office is seeking to dismiss the lawsuit.
At a hearing on May 13 in a federal case, a lawyer for James’ office said he was “nearing the end of the investigation” and that “there is obviously a significant amount of evidence” supporting civil enforcement proceedings, although a final decision has not been made.
Since James’ investigation is of a civilian nature, she could file a lawsuit and seek financial penalties against Trump or his company, or even a ban on their participation in certain types of business.
That happened in January, when a judge banned the former executive director of the pharmaceutical company, Martin Shkreli from the pharmaceutical industry, for life.