New York AG Letitia James tells ABC News that she is prepared to seize Donald Trump's assets if he is unable to pay the $354 million fine in his civil fraud case.

The New York attorney general made the remarks in an interview with ABC News.

Four days after a judge ordered former President Donald Trump to pay $354 million in his civil fraud case, New York Attorney General Letitia James told ABC News that she is prepared to seize the former president’s assets if he is unable to find the cash to cover the fine.

“If he does not have funds to pay off the judgment, then we will seek judgment enforcement mechanisms in court, and we will ask the judge to seize his assets,” James said in an interview with ABC News’ Aaron Katersky.

Trump was fined $354.8 million plus approximately $100 million in pre-judgment interest on Friday after Judge Arthur Engoron determined that he inflated his net worth in order get more favorable loan terms.

  • NatakuNox@lemmy.world
    101·
    10 months ago

    Who’s going to bond someone that never pays their bills? Trump has to scraping the bottom of his personal liquid money.

      • mr_robot@lemmy.worldEnglish
        9·
        10 months ago

        Commonly, 10% of a bond is required up-front. Trump’s total liability in this case is closer to $450 million, so he will need to front approximately $45 million in cash to obtain a bond. Most reputable news outlets estimate he has this in liquid assets.

        However, collateral covering the full liability of the judgment is required to secure the bond. Speculation is that several of his properties will be required collateral.

        Trump may try to secure collateral through other means such as capturing RNC or PAC funds, taking his social disinformation network public, etc.

        I’m looking forward to watching it play out. The civil trials have partially resorted my faith in the rule of law. The criminal cases will determine if Trump can put himself above the rule of law. A successful presidential election, or the Supreme Court granting him “absolute immunity” and I doubt anyone is seeing a dime of the civil judgements against him.

        • eestileib@sh.itjust.works
          1·
          10 months ago

          I’m gonna hold off on him actually paying before I get too excited about rule of law.

          Him being found liable is certainly better than the alternative.