You write that the New York law “absolutely violates Due Process, because it does not require the State to prove the underlying alleged repeated or persistent fraud or illegality as a predicate for the AG to sue under the Statute.”
Proving a claim isn’t a PREDICATE for suing. The AG brings the suit to assert the claims, the defendant denies them, and the case is tried to determine whether the State has proved its allegations. If the State can’t prove the fraud or illegality, then the defendant will win. That’s normal procedure, not a violation of the Due Process Clause.
If the judge is Lavrentiy Beria, the evidence does not matter.
The case law you cited says "We have already held that the failure to allege losses does not require dismissal of a claim for disgorgement under Executive Law § 63(12)" (see People v Ernst & Young LLP, 114 AD3d 569, 569-570 [1st Dept 2014])." Therefore, the NY courts have dispensed with the element of damages when a cause of action under Executive Law sec.63(12)is being pled and tried by the State. In essence, the State does not have to show that the civil cause of action for fraud satisfies all of the elements required for a civil action for fraud. Damages is an essential element of a cause of action for fraud. Due process is violated because the State has established a rule of civil procedure that is only available to them, and is different than those that apply to the general public. The general public absolutely has to plead and show that they were damaged by the alleged fraud.