N.Y. AG counselor: Evidence in Trump case ‘substantial’
NEW YORK — As a federal judge weighs Donald Trump’s lawsuit seeking to halt a civil investigation into his business practices, a lawyer for the New York attorney general’s office said Friday that evidence found throughout the threeyear probe could support legal action against the former president, his company, or both.
“There’s clearly been a substantial amount of evidence amassed that could support the filing of an enforcement proceeding,” said Andrew Amer, a special litigation counselor in Attorney General Letitia James’ office. He added during the hearing in Trump’s lawsuit against James that a final determination on filing such an action has not been made.
Amer said the office is “nearing the end” of the civil investigation, which James has said uncovered evidence Trump’s company misstated the value of assets like skyscrapers and golf courses on financial statements for more than a decade.
The former president has denied wrongdoing. His lawyers contend James is using her investigation to gain access to information that could then be used against him in the parallel criminal investigation.
Trump’s lawyer, seeking to halt the civil investigation, argued at Friday’s hearing that James’ probe is a politically motivated fishing expedition and that by targeting him, she is violating Trump’s constitutional right to equal protection under the law.
James, a Democrat, has filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit.
U.S. District Judge Brenda Sannes said she would consider both requests and deliver a decision in writing. She did not give a timetable for a ruling.
Sannes listened to arguments from Amer and Trump lawyer Alina Habba for about an hour via video. She asked probing questions about recent legal battles over subpoenas for Trump’s testimony and evidence, and the role of federal courts intervening in a state matter.
Trump sued James in federal court in upstate New York in December after her office issued subpoenas requiring him and his two eldest children — Ivanka and Donald Trump Jr. — to answer questions under oath. A state appeals court heard arguments Wednesday as the Trumps seek to reverse a lower-court judge’s ruling enforcing the subpoenas.
Habba argued at Friday’s hearing that James was investigating Trump to make good on promises she made during her campaign for attorney general in 2018, using the office to harass him and his company with myriad subpoenas and evidence requests.
“We’ve produced millions and millions and millions of pages” of evidence, Habba told Sannes. “We keep getting subpoenas. They keep looking for things.”
Amer countered that the investigation is on solid legal ground, noting that the state judge overseeing legal fights over subpoenas issued by the attorney general’s office has found there is a “sufficient basis for continuing its investigation.”
Amer said the probe, now “nearly concluded,” has uncovered ample evidence that could support a civil enforcement action.
All of that, Amer said, “really shuts the door on any argument” by Trump’s lawyers that the attorney general’s office was proceeding in bad faith.
James’ office and Trump’s lawyers have made several agreements extending the deadline for a potential decision, writing in one court filing that doing so “is in their mutual benefit and interest.” One agreement posted to the state court docket set an April 30 deadline, but Habba said Trump’s lawyers recently agreed to another extension.
The midlevel state appeals court that heard arguments Wednesday in Trump’s testimony fight isn’t expected to take up his appeal of a recent contempt-of-court finding until the fall.