Kathy Hochul has already explained to worried New Jerk state realtors and business people that the state is only using "the law" to go after one person.
"It's TOTALLY not a bill of attainder against Donald Trump! wink, wink." - Kathy Hochul
New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) addressed New York business owners in a new interview and told them there was “nothing to worry about” after former President Trump was hit with a $355 million fine and the inability to conduct business in New York for three years.
“I think that this is really an extraordinary unusual circumstance that the law-abiding and rule-following New Yorkers who are business people have nothing to worry about because they’re very different than Donald Trump and his behavior,” Hochul responded.
====================
Some "freepers", like joesbucks, think this is a perfectly valid application of "the law", and is totally above board.
He's been willing to defend that proposition on this thread here
He's a lefty, that's it, and all of it. Goes on this board with the most asinine comments and opinions that I've seen.
She did caveat with law abiding and rule following businesses. You’re saying they’re not?
My guess. A lot of accounting departments have been working overtime dotting i’s and crossing t’s to assure documents didn’t contain those types of misrepresentations. And corporate attorney phones were red hot with questions about exposure/risk.
bkmk
I'm trying to piece together the various positions on this case so that I can understand yours. I expect that you will enlighten me upon reading this.
I'll start by posting the exact law in question:
12. Whenever any person shall engage in repeated fraudulent or illegal acts or otherwise demonstrate persistent fraud or illegality in the carrying on, conducting or transaction of business, the attorney general may apply, in the name of the people of the state of New York, to the supreme court of the state of New York, on notice of five days, for an order enjoining the continuance of such business activity or of any fraudulent or illegal acts, directing restitution and damages and, in an appropriate case, cancelling any certificate filed under and by virtue of the provisions of section four hundred forty of the former penal law or section one hundred thirty of the general business law, and the court may award the relief applied for or so much thereof as it may deem proper. The word "fraud" or "fraudulent" as used herein shall include any device, scheme or artifice to defraud and any deception, misrepresentation, concealment, suppression, false pretense, false promise or unconscionable contractual provisions. The term "persistent fraud" or "illegality" as used herein shall include continuance or carrying on of any fraudulent or illegal act or conduct. The term "repeated" as used herein shall include repetition of any separate and distinct fraudulent or illegal act, or conduct which affects more than one person. Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, all monies recovered or obtained under this subdivision by a state agency or state official or employee acting in their official capacity shall be subject to subdivision eleven of section four of the state finance law.I bolded what I believe is the relevant phrases to this debate around this case.In connection with any such application, the attorney general is authorized to take proof and make a determination of the relevant facts and to issue subpoenas in accordance with the civil practice law and rules. Such authorization shall not abate or terminate by reason of any action or proceeding brought by the attorney general under this section.
That is why there is language about "in the name of the people," "restitution and damages," "award the relief," "schemes, deceptions, false representations," and most importantly " repetition of any separate and distinct fraudulent or illegal act, or conduct which affects more than one person." This would clearly indicate that the law was targeted to phone bank operations, door-to-door scammers, etc., who run the same scheme on person after person after person.
We used to call them "flimflam artists."
For this law to apply to Trump, the meaning of the law would have to be turned upside-down: Trump becomes the predator, the banks become the scammed, and there has to be a pattern of repeated schemes to damage multiple banks via fraudulent misrepresentations. In order to accomplish this, it would have to be proven that:
11. (a) Notwithstanding any other law to the contrary and except as provided by paragraph (b) of this subdivision, no state agency or a state official or employee acting in their official capacity, may pay out or otherwise disburse funds obtained as the result of a judgment, stipulation, decree, agreement to settle, assurance of discontinuance, or other legal instrument resolving any claim or cause of action, whether filed or unfiled, actual or potential, and whether arising under common law, equity, or any provision of law, except pursuant to an appropriation. Such funds shall not be retained by any state official, employee, or agency in any fund held in the sole custody of a state agency for a period of more than thirty days but shall, consistent with section seven of article seven of the state constitution be deposited in the state treasury, or fund under its management as may be directed by statute or as otherwise directed by the comptroller with the concurrence of the director of the budget.(b) Paragraph (a) of this subdivision shall not apply to (1) moneys to be distributed to the federal government, to a local government, or to any holder of a bond or other debt instrument issued by the state, any public authority, or any public benefit corporation; (2) moneys to be distributed solely or exclusively as a payment of damages or restitution to individuals or entities that were specifically injured or harmed by the defendant's or settling party's conduct and that are identified in, or can be identified by the terms of, the relevant judgment, agreement to settle, assurance of discontinuance, or relevant instrument resolving the claim or cause of action;
[skip]
As a consumer protection law, paragraph (b) of subdivision eleven of section four requires that the judgement against Trump must be distributed as "payment of damages or restitution to individuals or entities that were specifically injured or harmed" as stated in 63(12) above. Who are these people? Has Letitia James identified who receives the restitution from the $350 million judgement?
If James cannot identify the recipients of the judgement, it is because the law was misapplied and twisted into unrecognizability. I would argue that the fine of $350 million violates New York state law because subdivision eleven of section four of the state finance law prohibits the Attorney General from using this money for any other purpose than as restitution as a result of this judgement.
What say you?
-PJ
Joebucks should have been kicked off this site years ago.
Thanks everyone, for the insightful responses( and some of the stupid ones) but let me try again. Could the governor put a stop to this by granting a pardon or a stay of execution or something.
I’m asking about the legality only, is it possible?
I know idiot Hochul is probably gleeful about this happening to trump, (duh...) but if the truckers strike and other businessmen strike really start to cripple ny city, could there be a legal effort she could pursue (probably in a panic) to stop it?
Thank you! That was the term I was looking for and had not heard in a long time “bill of attainder”