**In a significant ruling, the New York Supreme Court's Appellate Division eliminated the hefty financial penalty previously ordered by Judge Arthur Engoron in the civil fraud case against Donald Trump and his company, while affirming their liability.**
**Court Overturns Trump's Massive Civil Fraud Penalty in New York Case**
**Court Overturns Trump's Massive Civil Fraud Penalty in New York Case**
**A New York appeals court has nullified a $500 million penalty imposed on Donald Trump for civil fraud, attributing the decision to excessive punishment while upholding his liability for fraud.**
An appeals court has made headlines by overturning a staggering $500 million penalty initially levied against former President Donald Trump in a civil fraud trial in New York. The decision, announced by the New York Supreme Court's Appellate Division, highlighted that while Trump and his organization were indeed found liable for fraudulent practices—specifically inflating asset values to secure advantageous loans—the monetary punishment was deemed excessively harsh and potentially unconstitutional.
Judge Arthur Engoron previously mandated that Trump pay $355 million, a sum which ballooned to over $500 million when interest was added. The appellate ruling suggested that although the alleged fraudulent activities caused harm, it did not reach the severity that justified such a monumental financial penalty. "The court found that this harm was not cataclysmic enough to warrant a near half-billion-dollar award," noted Judge Peter Moulton in the ruling.
In light of the court's findings, Trump announced his satisfaction with the decision, branding it a "total victory" on his social media platform, Truth Social. He framed the ruling as a necessary rebuke of what he described as a "Political Witch Hunt" against him and asserted that it would benefit businesses across New York State.
On the other side, the New York Attorney General's Office, responsible for initiating the fraud suit, also described aspects of the ruling as favorable. They emphasized that Trump's liability for fraud—along with other non-financial penalties—was upheld, and indicated plans to appeal the elimination of the financial penalty to New York's highest court.
The ruling, which spanned 323 pages and included multiple opinions, revealed divisions among the five judges regarding the merits of the case brought forward by Attorney General Letitia James. Some judges contended she exercised her lawful authority, whereas others argued for a dismissal or a retrial with narrow parameters. The overarching sentiment, however, was a desire for judicial finality, as expressed in Judge Moulton's remarks regarding the political landscape shaped by voter sentiment toward Trump.
Notably, the ruling coincided with ongoing scrutiny over how the judicial system navigates cases involving prominent political figures, raising questions about whether the extensive nature of the decision would be similar if it involved an ordinary businessperson. Legal experts suggest this long and complex ruling reflects the unprecedented circumstances surrounding the case.
As the legal battle continues, Trump’s supporters, including his son Eric Trump, have hailed the appellate court’s decision as a long-awaited triumph, while commentators emphasize the prolonged wait for a definitive resolution in this high-stakes fraud litigation.
