Trump asks to remove judge from New York fraud case.
Lawyers representing former President Trump have filed a new motion in his New York civil fraud case, alleging that the judge involved engaged in “prohibited communications” and should therefore recuse himself from the case. The motion, filed with the New York State Supreme Court, accuses Judge Arthur Engoron of actions that are “fundamentally incompatible with the responsibilities attendant to donning the black robe and sitting in judgment.”
The motion specifically references a conversation that Engoron allegedly had with New York City real estate attorney Adam Leitman Bailey. This conversation reportedly touched upon various aspects of the case, such as its merits, the permissible scope of the New York State Attorney General’s authority, and the potential consequences of the court’s decision on business in the state.
Alina Habba, spokesperson for Trump, emphasized the importance of the New York Code of Judicial Conduct in ensuring fair and impartial trials. The alleged communications between Judge Engoron and Attorney Bailey, however, are seen as a direct violation of this code, leading Habba to call for Engoron’s immediate recusal from the case.
The civil fraud trial in question involves the Trump Organization and stems from a case brought forward by New York Attorney General Letitia James. Engoron previously found Trump liable for over $350 million in damages, citing charges such as persistent fraud, falsifying business records, issuing false financial statements, and conspiracy to commit various forms of fraud.
During the trial, Engoron criticized Trump’s behavior, noting that the former president often failed to answer questions directly and tended to veer off-topic with lengthy speeches that were irrelevant to the trial proceedings.
The filing from Trump’s legal team highlights an interview in which Bailey mentioned attempting to advise Engoron prior to the judge’s decision. Though Bailey did not mention Trump by name during the conversation, implications suggest that the discussion was indeed related to the ongoing case.
In response to these allegations, a spokesperson for the court denied any ex parte communication between Engoron and Bailey, stating that the judge’s decision was made independently and without external influence. However, in light of the accusations, the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct has reportedly launched an investigation into Engoron’s conduct.
Trump’s lawyers argue that any communication outside the presence of the parties or their legal representatives should be closely scrutinized. They stress that the court has a duty to avoid such ex parte communications and, if they do occur, to inform all parties promptly. Failure to do so, as alleged in this case, could warrant recusal from the proceedings.
The filing also points out Bailey’s history of litigation against Trump in a previous condo dispute, adding a layer of complexity to the allegations of improper communication between the attorney and Engoron.
Ultimately, Trump’s legal team requests that the court either recuse itself from the case or hold an evidentiary hearing to address the alleged communications and any resulting implications. The motion underscores the importance of upholding judicial conduct standards to ensure a fair and impartial trial for all parties involved.
