President Donald Trump just can’t catch a break in the courtroom, as a federal appeals court has slapped him with a hefty fine for what they call a completely groundless legal stunt.
The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Wednesday, November 26, 2025, that Trump and his former attorney Alina Habba must pay nearly $938,000—split among numerous defendants—for filing a lawsuit deemed frivolous against Hillary Clinton, former FBI Director James Comey, and a long list of others over Russian collusion allegations.
Let’s rewind to the start of this legal saga, which began with a lawsuit Trump filed claiming that Clinton, Comey, Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and others conspired to sabotage his 2016 campaign victory. It’s a bold accusation, no doubt, but the courts didn’t see it that way, dismissing the case as lacking merit. And now, the bill for that misstep has come due.
Back in 2023, Judge Donald Middlebrooks ordered a $1 million penalty against Trump and Habba for pursuing this now-dismissed case, calling it a waste of judicial resources. That original ruling didn’t sit well with the Trump team, so they appealed, hoping for a reversal.
Fast forward to this week, and the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals said, “No dice,” upholding the penalty on November 26, 2025, with the final amount adjusted to roughly $938,000. That’s a lot of zeroes for a lawsuit that never had legs, and it’s hard not to wonder if this was more about settling scores than seeking justice.
Speaking of scores, Judge Middlebrooks didn’t hold back in his assessment, stating, “Here we are confronted with a lawsuit that should never have been filed, which was completely frivolous, both factually and legally, and which was brought in bad faith for an improper purpose.” Ouch—that’s a judicial burn if there ever was one, though one might argue the courtroom shouldn’t be a stage for personal vendettas on either side.
In a separate jab, Judge Middlebrooks added, “Mr. Trump is a prolific and sophisticated litigant who is repeatedly using the courts to seek revenge on political adversaries.” While the judge’s frustration is clear, it’s worth asking if this penalty is truly about principle or just another chapter in the endless Trump-versus-the-establishment drama.
The defendants in this case—dozens of them, including Clinton, Comey, and former FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page—will split the nearly $938,000 penalty. Two of them even pushed for additional sanctions, claiming Trump’s appeal was equally baseless, but the court declined to pile on more punishment. A small mercy, perhaps, but the financial sting remains.
Now, let’s not forget Alina Habba, Trump’s former lawyer in this mess, who currently serves as the U.S. attorney for New Jersey. Her involvement in this failed lawsuit raises eyebrows about whether legal advice or political loyalty drove this train off the tracks. Still, she’s on the hook alongside Trump for the hefty fine.
In a curious side note, just days before this appeals court ruling, a federal court tossed out false statements charges against James Comey in an unrelated matter. Judge Cameron Currie, a Clinton appointee in South Carolina, ruled that the charges were brought by an unqualified U.S. attorney, Lindsay Halligan, appointed by Trump only weeks earlier. It’s a separate issue, but the timing feels like a double whammy for the Trump camp.
Challenges to Halligan’s appointment, raised by Comey and another individual named James, were combined due to their overlapping nature. Judge Currie stepped in to oversee the matter because of a conflict involving Virginia judges. It’s a procedural tangle, but it adds another layer of courtroom friction to Trump’s orbit.
Meanwhile, Fox News Digital reached out to the White House for a statement on the appeals court ruling, but no response was forthcoming. One can only imagine the frustration brewing on the South Lawn, where Trump was spotted just days earlier on November 22, 2025. Silence speaks volumes sometimes, doesn’t it?
For conservatives who see Trump as a fighter against a biased system, this ruling might feel like yet another example of the judiciary piling on. But even supporters must admit that not every battle is worth fighting—especially when the price tag is nearly a million bucks. Resources matter, and this penalty could have funded plenty of other causes.
On the flip side, critics of progressive overreach in the courts might argue that penalties like this are less about justice and more about discouraging dissent against the political elite. Still, the facts remain: the lawsuit was dismissed, the appeal failed, and the bill is due. It’s a tough lesson in picking one’s fights wisely.
So, where does this leave us? Trump’s legal battles continue to dominate headlines, often overshadowing policy debates that deserve more attention, and this latest ruling is a reminder that the courtroom isn’t always the best arena for political grievances. For now, the nearly $938,000 penalty stands as a costly footnote in an ongoing saga, and one can only hope future efforts focus on substance over spectacle.
