Donald Trump, Don Jr., and Ivanka Must Testify in NY Attorney General’s Investigation, Judge Rules

TIMOTHY A. CLARY/AFP via Getty Images.

A judge ruled on Thursday that former President Donald Trump, Donald Trump Jr., and Ivanka Trump must testify in an investigation by the New York Attorney General, issuing a scathing opinion that quoted both George Orwell and Lewis Carroll in rejecting the Trump family’s arguments.

Manhattan Supreme Court Judge Arthur Engoron was unpersuaded by claims made by the Trumps that Attorney General Letitia James was targeting the former president and his family because of “viewpoint discrimination” and “probably because he can win again in ’24.”

James is seeking to subpoena the former president and two of his adult children for depositions, as well as subpoena documents and other evidence, as part of a probe into the finances of the Trump Organization, including allegations that “fraudulent or misleading” asset valuations were used on multiple properties.

There was a new twist in the case earlier this month when Mazars USA, the Trump Org’s longtime accountants, issued a letter not only dropping the company as a client but declaring that the company’s financial statements going back a decade were not credible and “should not be relied upon.”

Trump attorney Alina Habba had gone so far as to try to argue that Donald Trump was in some sort of “protected class,” according to Law & Crime’s Adam Klasfeld, a legal term that applies to categories like race, gender, or religion. The Trumps also argued that it was unfair to allow them to be questioned under a civil probe while they were under the specter of a potential criminal investigation, the charges that had been filed by the Manhattan District Attorney against Trump Org and its former chief financial officer, Allen Weisselberg.

Another Trump attorney, Ron Fischetti, called the matter “a unique case” because it dealt with “the former president of the United States.” If former President Trump had to answer questions in a deposition, Fischetti argued, his answers would “be on the front page of every newspaper in the world.”

Engoron found these arguments unpersuasive, denying the Trumps’ motion to quash the subpoenas the AG had requested.

The ruling was little surprise to observers, who had seen Engoron openly skeptical of many of the Trump attorney’s arguments in a hearing earlier Thursday. As Klasfeld reported on a portion of the hearing addressing the claims the subpoenas were a violation of their constitutional rights:

Engoron shot back that the Constitution already provides protection against his clients’ self-incrimination: the Fifth Amendment.

“Can’t they just refuse to answer?” Engoron said. “Isn’t that what Eric Trump did 500 times?”

Deposed shortly before the 2020 presidential election, Eric Trump indeed invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination more than 500 times, according to an attorney general’s filing in January. [Trump attorney Alan] Futerfas insists that this puts his clients at a disadvantage because asserting their constitutional rights in the criminal process can harm them in the civil process. In criminal law, refusing to answer law enforcement cannot be used against someone.

In the civil process, such a refusal can result in an “adverse inference” being drawn.

In the ruling, Engoron not only ruled the AG’s requests were proper, but framed the situation as one that would have been a “blatant dereliction of duty” if she had not investigated this case and issued the subpoenas.

“[T]he impetus for the investigation was not personal animus, not racial or ethnic or other discrimination, not campaign promises, but was sworn congressional testimony by former Trump associate Michael Cohen that respondents were ‘cooking the books,’” wrote Engoron.

The Trumps had “failed to submit any evidence that the law was not applied to others similarly situated, nor have they submitted any evidence of discrimination based on race, religion, or any other impermissible or arbitrary classification,” he added.

Regarding the potential Fifth Amendment implications, Engoron reflected his stance during the hearing and wrote, “The target of a hybrid civil/criminal investigation cannot use the Fifth Amendment as both a sword and a shield; a shield against questions and a sword against the investigation itself.”

Near the end of the 8-page opinion, the judge addressed the claim by the Trump attorneys that the Mazars USA letter should somehow exonerate the company:

The idea that an accounting firm’s announcement that no one should rely on a decade’s worth of financial statements that it issued based on numbers submitted by an entity somehow exonerates that entity and renders an investigation into its past practices moot is reminiscent of Lewis Carroll (“When I use a word, Humpty Dumpty said…it means just what I chose it to mean — neither more nor less”); George Orwell (“War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength”); and “alternative facts.”

…To proclaim that the Mazars’ red-flag warning that the Trump financial statements are unreliable suddenly renders the OAG’s longstanding investigation moot is audacious as it is preposterous.

Former President Trump, Donald Trump Jr., and Ivanka Trump have 21 days from the date of Thursday’s order to sit for a deposition, according to Engoron’s ruling. Donald Trump was also ordered to comply with the AG’s subpoena requesting documents and information within 14 days.