I think you are conflating how you think things should be with how things actually are.
Since Trump was sued for things related to his business and not related to his campaign, it would be probably be illegal for the campaign to pay his legal expenses, even though there is an obvious political motivation to the case.
In order to appeal to SCOTUS, Trump will first have to exhaust his appeals through the NYS appeals courts. It is doubtful SCOTUS would short-circuit the process on a case like this, if it is even possible.
Understand, I agree that this is a political case and the facts of the case and the size of the award make it very likely Trump will get at least some relief if not an outright reversal. Unfortunately, the way the system is structured, that process will take time and money, and there may not be any way to speed up the process.
No conflation. I'm saying what should be based on the Constitution.
Since Trump was sued for things related to his business and not related to his campaign, it would be probably be illegal for the campaign to pay his legal expenses, even though there is an obvious political motivation to the case.
I disagree. If there is proven political motivation, then the expense to fight it is a campaign expense.
In order to appeal to SCOTUS, Trump will first have to exhaust his appeals through the NYS appeals courts. It is doubtful SCOTUS would short-circuit the process on a case like this, if it is even possible.
Hasn't the NYS Court of Appeals already denied consideration for a stay pending appeal without Trump coming up with the absurdly expensive bond?