The New York State Attorney General has filed a motion to keep Judge Arthur Engoron on Donald Trump's civil fraud case despite a recusal request from Trump's legal team.
NBC New York reported that the motion argues that Judge Engoron should stay on the case despite allegations of inappropriate interactions with an outside lawyer.
On Wednesday, the New York State Attorney General's office filed a motion to ensure Judge Arthur Engoron remains presiding over Donald Trump's civil fraud case.
This motion came in response to a request by Trump's lawyers for the judge to recuse himself from the case.
Trump's legal team filed the recusal motion based on claims by attorney Adam Leitman Bailey. Bailey alleged he had conversations with Judge Engoron about the law applicable to Trump's case shortly before a significant ruling.
According to Bailey, these discussions occurred three weeks before Judge Engoron imposed a $454 million penalty on Trump in February. Despite these claims, Bailey stated in interviews with WNBC that Trump was never mentioned by name during their conversations.
Bailey approached Judge Engoron to share his views on what he believed was a misapplication of the law. However, Attorney General Letitia James emphasized that there is no evidence to suggest that Judge Engoron relied on anything Bailey said.
Judicial rules require judges to disclose any outside input on a case to the involved parties. Trump's lawyers argue that the judge's impartiality is now in question due to Bailey's comments.
The New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct (NYSCJC) is reportedly investigating the interactions between Engoron and Bailey. Trump's legal team cited this ongoing investigation in their recusal filing.
However, the Attorney General's office downplayed the significance of the alleged ethics investigation. A court spokesperson also stated that no ex parte conversation relevant to the case occurred between Judge Engoron and Bailey.
The spokesperson stressed that Judge Engoron's decision was made independently. Bailey himself confirmed that he has a professional relationship with the judge but insisted that he approached him only to discuss his view of the fraud statute.
Bailey mentioned in interviews that he had no involvement in the Trump case and had never spoken to either Trump’s attorneys or the Attorney General about the case. He maintained that he is completely impartial.
Trump has consistently accused Judge Engoron of bias, an accusation that the judge has denied. Attorney General James defended the judge's ruling, highlighting evidence of repeated fraudulent behavior by Trump and others.
There is currently no word on when Judge Engoron will decide on the recusal motion. Meanwhile, Trump's legal team is also appealing to have Engoron's ruling dismissed.
In their filing, Trump's lawyers described the judge’s recusal demand as "amounts to a hill of beans." Bailey, in his defense, told WNBC, "I wanted him to know what I think and why… I really want him to get it right.”
Bailey further elaborated on his interaction with the judge, stating, "I gave him everything I knew. He had a lot of questions, you know about certain cases. We went over it." He also emphasized, "I had nothing to do with this case. I have never spoken to the Trump attorneys or the attorney general about this case. I’m completely impartial."
Professor Bruce Green weighed in, explaining, "Judges don't have to live in a bubble. Whether a judge's hallway conversation with a lawyer is permissible or impermissible depends on the conversation." This context is crucial in understanding the nature of Bailey’s interaction with Judge Engoron.
Attorney General James stood by the judge's ruling, stating it was based on "repeated and persistent fraud in the conduct of their business."
This defense is part of a broader effort to affirm the integrity of the judicial process in this high-profile case.
Trump’s legal team, however, remains focused on questioning the judge's impartiality. In their filing, they argued, “Where, as here, this Court’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned under the circumstances, it must recuse. Indeed, there is no other means of dispelling the shadow that now looms over this Court’s impartiality.”
Al Baker, a court spokesperson, reinforced that “No ex parte conversation concerning this matter occurred between Justice Engoron and Mr. Bailey or any other person. The decision issued February 16 was his alone, was deeply considered, and was wholly uninfluenced by this individual.”
The New York Attorney General's office is urging Judge Engoron to remain on the Trump civil fraud case despite a recusal request from Trump's legal team.
The request for recusal hinges on allegations of inappropriate interactions between the judge and attorney Adam Leitman Bailey.
However, both the Attorney General and a court spokesperson have defended Judge Engoron's independence in making his decisions. As the case progresses, the focus remains on ensuring judicial integrity and addressing claims of impartiality. Trump's legal team continues to push for the judge’s recusal and dismissal of the ruling, highlighting the ongoing tensions in this high-stakes legal battle.
