A judge on Monday morning will consider whether to hold former President Trump in contempt for violating a court order that he comply with a subpoena regarding a civil investigation into his business practices.
New York Attorney General Letitia James (D) is asking a state judge to fine Trump $10,000 for each day that he has failed to turn over documents relevant to its subpoena.
Earlier this month, her office accused Trump of defying the court order by claiming that he doesnāt have any documents sought by the subpoena and even raising objections to the records demand after he was commanded to comply with it.
āMr. Trumpās purported āResponseā violates the Courtās order; it is not full compliance, or any degree of compliance, but simply more delay and obfuscation,ā Jamesās office wrote in its contempt motion.
āIn the circumstances presented here, long after the subpoenaās return date had passed, and long after this Court denied the motion to quash, Mr. Trump had no further right to contest the subpoena.ā
The investigation is a civil matter, meaning it canāt lead directly to criminal charges, but itās running parallel to a Manhattan district attorney probe which has already resulted in the indictment of the Trump Organizationās chief financial officer.
While Trump has repeatedly attacked James and her probe into his business practices, his lawyers deny that he has improperly withheld anything from investigators.
James has said that the investigation is focusing on whether the Trump Organization inflated the value of its assets over the years for financial gain. Her office has claimed to have found āsignificantā evidence pointing to rampant financial fraud at the company and a state court judge who personally reviewed some of the requested documents appears to agree.
In February, New York Supreme Court Judge Arthur Engoron rejected Trumpās effort to block Jamesās subpoena, ordering the former president to provide both documents and testimony to the attorney generalās office. Engoron wrote that Trumpās arguments that the investigation is politically motivated have little bearing on whether he must comply with the subpoena.
āIn the final analysis, a State Attorney General commences investigating a business entity, uncovers copious evidence of possible financial fraud, and wants to question, under oath, several of the entitiesā principals, including its namesake. She has the clear right to do so,ā the judge said.
Trump appealed Engoronās order to sit for a deposition, which is currently pending before the stateās appellate court, but his lawyers raised no objections initially to the part of the ruling concerning document production.
Alina Habba, Trumpās lawyer, told the court last week that her client has not defied the ruling and that any records relevant to Jamesās subpoena are in his companyās possession.
āAfter conducting a diligent search and review, Respondentās counsel determined that Respondent was not in possession of any documents responsive to the Subpoena and that all potentially responsive documents were in the possession, custody or control of the Trump Organization,ā Habba wrote.
Mirroring Trumpās social media attacks against the state attorney general, Habba also suggested that the contempt motion was politically motivated.
āGiven the OAGās recalcitrant behavior, it is fair to question the OAGās motive in bringing the instant application, which appears to be little more than a contrived publicity stunt,ā she wrote, using an acronym for the Office of the Attorney General.
Itās unclear whether Engoron will ultimately hold Trump in contempt. E. Danya Perry, a former New York state deputy attorney general whoās now in private practice, said judges have broad discretion in determining whether litigants have defied court orders and what sanctions to impose in order to coerce compliance, but that they typically avoid imposing punitive measures.
āItās not meant to punish the person found in contempt, itās really meant to coerce them into compliance,ā Perry said. āSo here, the judge will have to assess what it will take to actually light a fire and get them to comply with the courtās order.ā
She said that Trumpās legal team will likely be hard-pressed on Monday to show that they are making good-faith efforts to comply with Engoronās ruling.
āThis gamesmanship over whether or not the documents are in Mr. Trumpās custody when clearly theyāre in the custody of the Trump Organization is a distinction without a difference,ā Perry said. āA lot of courts will be tolerant over internal deadlines that are blown, but they tend to look askance at a blown court-ordered deadline.ā
Story cited here.
Scroll down to leave a comment: