New York appeals court refuses to act in Trump's challenge to gag orders in civil fraud trial
A New York appeals court has rejected former President Donald Trump’s bid to overturn gag orders and fines for violations imposed in his civil fraud trial. Image from Shutterstock.
A New York appeals court has rejected former President Donald Trump’s bid to overturn gag orders and fines for violations imposed in his civil fraud trial.
The Appellate Division’s First Judicial Department of the New York Supreme Court rejected Trump’s petition and rejected his leave to appeal to the state’s highest court, report Law360, Courthouse News Service and Law.com.
The Dec. 14 decisions are here and here.
Ruling Oct. 3, Judge Arthur Engoron had barred any parties in the civil fraud case from posting, emailing or speaking publicly about members of his staff. Engoron imposed the gag order after Trump alleged on Truth social, his social media platform, that Engoron’s law clerk was biased and “running this case against me.” He included her name and photo.
Engoron expanded the gag order Nov. 3 to prevent attorneys in the case from making public statements about confidential communications between himself and staff members. Engoron fined Trump $5,000 and then $10,000 for violations.
The appeals court said Trump didn’t have standing to challenge the gag order that applied to the attorneys. The appeals court also said Trump wrongly challenged the order by seeking an extraordinary remedy.
Trump had filed a so-called Article 78 petition, which is based on a state law that effectively allows lawsuits against judges, Courthouse News Service explains. Trump also sought a writ of prohibition.
Article 78 is a codification of the common-law writ of prohibition, which is “to restrain an unwarranted assumption of jurisdiction and to prevent a court from exceeding its powers,” the appeals court said. Neither is an appropriate way to challenge Engoron’s orders, the appeals court said.
When considering whether to grant the extraordinary remedy of a writ of prohibition, courts must consider the gravity of harm and whether a judge’s exercise of excess power can be corrected by an appeal or other ordinary proceedings, the appeals court said.
“Here, the gravity of potential harm is small, given that the gag order is narrow, limited to prohibiting solely statements regarding the court’s staff,” the appeals court said. “Further, while the gag order and contempt orders were not issued pursuant to formal motion practice, they are reviewable through the ordinary appellate process.”
A lawyer for Trump, Christopher Kise, criticized the decision in a statement to the Law.com and other publications.
“We filed the petition because the ordinary appellate process is essentially pointless in this context as it cannot possibly be completed in time to reverse the ongoing harm,” Kise said. “Unfortunately, the decision denies President Trump the only path available to expedited relief and places his fundamental constitutional rights in a procedural purgatory.”
Testimony in the civil fraud trial ended Wednesday. The trial is expected to resume Jan. 11, according to Courthouse News Service.
See also:
“Gag order is reinstated in Trump’s civil case amid death threats towards judge and his staff”
“Judge extends gag order to lawyers in one Trump case while appeals court issues stay in another”
