291
BREAKING: Trump’s $515 Million Fraud Penalty THROWN OUT by Appeals Court
(www.mediaite.com)
Struck down due to the 8th amendment, which reads, in its entirety:
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
He was fined what he profitted from fraud that the judges agree he committed, plus interest. In what world is that excessive?
So, if you're going to steal, steal $500 million or more, because then the government can't take it back since that would be an excessive fine.
He was fined what he profitted from fraud that the judges agree he committed, plus interest. In what world is that excessive?
Wow... i saw the headlines but didn't realize this was the case. Not even punitive fines. Literally this is the ABSOLUTE MINIMUM it could be without fraud being profitable.
In the 323-page decision, Judge Moulton said that American voters had “obviously rendered a verdict” on Trump’s political career.
“This bench today unanimously derails the effort to destroy his business,” the judge wrote.
Judge says voters gave him that money fair and square
“This bench today unanimously derails the effort to destroy his business,” the judge wrote.
The entire business was fraudulent, top to bottom, it SHOULD be dismantled. That's like a judge whining that it's unfair to put Al Capone out of business.
without fraud being profitable.
Actually... scratch that.
With this fine, it actually was profitable. Interest is always lower than what someone could actually earn on the funds if they just dropped it into some broad market ETF, or reinvested it to commit more fraud.
It’s great that our bill of rights only applies to the rich now.
Always has.
It's ok, they just set a precident that if you steal $100 million or more, you won't have to pay it back because ots more than your worth, and is excessive. Cool, anyone up to rob a bank?
You need to rob the banking system, not just one bank.
The court made very clear that Trump, his feckless spawn, and the Trump organizing committed fraud. It just ruled that the judgement was excessive. They're still guilty. There will still be a penalty. It will just be lower.
If the fine goes lower, then the fine just becomes the cost of doing business.
Exactly. The courts don’t want to fix anything. They just want their cut.
The fine is what he profitted from fraud plus interest. How could that ever be considered excessive? What a joke.
Excessive? FUCK YOU.
To the surprise of absolutely no one Trump encounters no consequences as a result of his criminal behavior.
To the surprise of most... Go back and find threads discussing the original ruling and notice how everyone was celebrating, and see how the voices saying nothing will come of it get downvoted. They do this on purpose to pacify the masses, and when everyone is distracted with the next shitty situation they take away the little victories they gave you and you're too busy with the current scandal to worry about the broken legal system.
Aren't fraud penalties supposed to be excessive? Like if I could save $20 with fraud, and the fine was a reasonable $20, it wouldn't just be an ineffective deterrent. It would be a bad financial decision to not commit fraud.
Not in the US. That would bankrupt half of our corporate overlords and upset shareholders.
There were lots of US stories about "oh, this lady got millions for spilling coffee on her" (with no mention of just how bad those burns were and how unreasonable the temperature settings on McDonald's coffee machines actually were. This spurned a bunch of laws and rulings that put limits on liability.
The refrain of "they just wanted money" resonated with people. People who don't recognize that punishing companies on their balance sheet is often the only method capitalism offered to ever rectify these things.
So what I'm saying is, Luigi did nothing wrong.
Yeah, from now on, if anyone negatively speaks of the victim of McDonald's boiling hot coffee, I just say this, "two words: fused labia".
Either they are too stupid to understand and therefore not worth my time, or they understand and are horrified.
Free Luigi.
Guillotine the rich.
Boiling water should be about 100 degrees C, no?
Note that the article's embedded tweet by a right-wing rag that it's a "federal" court is wrong. That implies it would go to the Supreme Court, which of course is in Trump's corner.
No, this is the 1st Appellate Division in NY state court, which is the first appellate level above the Supreme Court (in NY, the "Supreme Court" is the lowest general court level).
Per James, it's getting appealed to the highest New York state court, the NY Court of Appeals. Trump could still challenge in federal court due to the 8th Amendment argument, but this is not over by any means and may very well be reversed again at the Court of Appeals.
In a statement released after the ruling, James stated her office’s intention to appeal it.
“The First Department today affirmed the well-supported finding of the trial court: Donald Trump, his company, and two of his children are liable for fraud,” James said.
“The court upheld the injunctive relief we won, limiting Donald Trump and the Trump Organization officers’ ability to do business in New York. It should not be lost to history: yet another court has ruled that the president violated the law, and that our case has merit.
“We will seek appeal to the Court of Appeals and continue to protect the rights and interests of New Yorkers.”
Inching closer to Russia every day.
This is going to be such an awful place to live by the end of our lives.
Release the Trump/Epstein files
America loves its autocrats breaking the law - clearly.
TRUMP SHOULD BE ARRESTED
Because of course. As soon as he won the election it was crystal clear that all his legal troubles would either vanish or be postponed for so long that they ultimately wouldn't matter anymore.
I'm sure it'll all go away and he'll live out his days happily, unbothered by anything.
this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2025
291 points (99.0% liked)
politics
31403 readers
3240 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS