The 8th Amendment comes out in favor of Trump in the New York Real Estate Case

American Thinker ^ | 02/27/2024 | Daniel R. Street

[SeekAndFind]

On February 16, 2024, a judge in New York State imposed fines totaling just over $360 million on former president Donald J. Trump, The Trump Organization, and several related Trump companies and trusts in the civil case brought by the New York attorney general.  President Trump’s sons Donald Trump, Jr. and Eric Trump were fined just over $4 million each.  The court imposed additional sanctions, including injunctions against former president Trump; Donald Trump, Jr.; and Eric Trump from serving as officers or directors in New York corporations for specified numbers of years, among other sanctions.

The media reporting on the court’s decision has been massive since the decision was rendered.  However, little or no reporting focused on the constitutionality of the fines under the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution.  President Trump and his co-defendants all have substantial 8th Amendment “excessive fine” challenges to raise.  In fact, a review of the facts and applicable law reveal that this decision is simply more election interference.

Background about the Case

The fines stem from a civil suit filed by New York attorney general Letitia James in 2022, claiming that former president Trump and his companies used falsely inflated asset valuations and misleading financial statements in dealings with lenders.  The suit alleges various different claims, chief among them the New York State Executive Law Section 63(12) “fraudulent or illegal acts” claims.

Importantly, the Trump case involved no victims. The court could not order any lender to be paid back or made whole, because the lenders not only were paid back, but all made money on the loans made to Trump.

Since the case did not present any victims, the New York judge ordered what is known as disgorgement — that is, to give up “profits.

[rlmorel]

In cases where the Constitution might not explain or allow for some modern thing, it SHOULD be a “living document” in the sense that it could be amended.

But they won’t do that. It hamstrings them too much. They would MUCH rather rely on court rulings, which if done sensibly, might be adequate.

But they aren’t. They are often partisan and frivolous, and in obvious Leftist ways.

[Mr Rogers]

Couple of things I don’t understand:

1 - Everyone KNEW the judge was going to impose an insane fine. The state requires the fine be paid before an appeal can be made. Why weren’t they prepared to do so?

2 - Why wasn’t the 8th Amendment argument being pushed all along, and why haven’t they filed for an immediate injunction against the payment of the fine in FEDERAL court? Since paying would bring ruin, it ought to be easy to argue the butthead court’s ruling should be put on immediate hold pending federal review of the amount.

[whitney69]

“I hope that James and the judge get disbarred for this travesty of justice.”

That is not far enough. If the higher court overturns the original decision then the lower court, to include the prosecuters and governor, are guilty of slander/liable. They have a responsibility of protecting the rights of their citizenry and if they fail it by determining a business is acting in a illegal manner and it isn’t, and publically pronounce it that way, then they are harming Trump’s businesses. Lawsuit.

wy69

[Blood of Tyrants]

Yep, both the judge and prosecutor had personal vendettas against Trump.

[Jumper]

Given the White House was caught putting a political operative in Fani’s office to coordinate the political attacks on Trump, the very same information may soon come to light in NYC. Follow the Staffers.

[Leep]

Does Trump get the money he had to spend on these bogus court trials?

[SuperLuminal]

No Amendment from the now defunct Constitution has any bearing on Trump’s case...

The only basis, in law, is now derived from the manifesto by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in 1845...