- An appeals court has ordered Donald Trump, Ivanka Trump and Donald Trump, Jr. to sit for depositions in a NY probe.
- The 3 Trumps will be asked about what AG Letitia James has called persistent fraud at the Trump Organization.
- The Trumps have argued that their testimony could be used against them in related criminal probes.
An appeals court has ordered Donald Trump, Ivanka Trump and Donald Trump, Jr. to sit for depositions in a sprawling New York probe of the Trump Organization.
Thursday's decision by the First Department Appellate Division, sitting in Manhattan, upholds a state court decision ordering the Trumps' prompt compliance with 5-month-old subpoenas demanding their testimony.
A panel of judges found that the 3 Trumps were lawfully called to testify in a probe by NY Attorney General Letitia James.
Over the course of her 3-year civil inquiry, James has alleged persistent financial fraud at the Trumps' international real estate and golf resort business.
In trying to quash James' subpoenas, Trump lawyers have argued that their testimony could be used against them in parallel criminal probes by the AG and the Manhattan District Attorney's office.
The Trump lawyers have also argued that James herself was biased against Trump, as evidenced by numerous press statements in which she vowed to sue the former president and take down his business.
But in its decision, the appellate panel found James civil probe was "lawfully initiated."
"The civil investigation was initiated in March 2019 after testimony before Congress by Michael Cohen, former Trump Organization senior executive and special counsel, in which Cohen alleged that respondent The Trump Organization, Inc. had issued fraudulent financial statements," Thursday's decision said.
"This sequence of events suggests that the investigation was lawfully initiated at its outset and well founded, apart from any parallel criminal investigation undertaken by the District Attorney."
The appellate court also shot down the Trumps' claims that James is conducting a politically motivated, "selective prosecution."
"A claim of selective prosecution requires a showing that the law has been administered 'with an evil eye and an unequal hand,'" the decision read, citing case law.
Instead, James' probe began "after public testimony of a senior corporate insider and reviewed significant volumes of evidence before issuing the subpoenas," the decision said.
"Appellants have not identified any similarly implicated corporation that was not investigated or any executives of such a corporation who were not deposed. Therefore, appellants have failed to demonstrate that they were treated differently from any similarly situated persons."
A lawyer for the Trump family, Alan Futerfas, said he is still reviewing the appellate decision and has not made a decision on whether to file a further appeal.