Legal experts are closely examining the situation surrounding former President Donald Trump's challenge to secure a $464 million appeal bond after a New York civil fraud judgment was issued against him.
Trump's attorneys recently stated in a court filing that obtaining such a substantial appeal bond was deemed a 'practical impossibility' given the circumstances at hand.
One legal expert, David Gelman, emphasized the unprecedented nature of the judgment, referring to it as a 'unicorn.' Gelman suggested that the judge should consider alternative methods for Trump to satisfy the bond, as coming up with $464 million in liquid cash is a significant challenge even for the wealthiest individuals.
A New York Appeals Court judge had previously denied Trump's request to delay payment of the $464 million owed as a result of the lawsuit brought by New York State Attorney General Letitia James. However, the judge did allow Trump and his sons to continue operating their business during the appeals process.
The ruling requiring Trump to post a bond for the full judgment amount followed allegations of fraud and asset inflation against the former president during a trial that spanned several months.
Gelman outlined three potential options for Trump, including choosing not to appeal, seeking permission to use his property as collateral, or challenging the constitutionality of the New York law in federal court.
Former federal prosecutor Andrew Cherkasky expressed confidence in Trump's ability to pursue legal avenues, even suggesting a potential appeal to the Supreme Court based on Eighth Amendment violations related to excessive fines.
Despite the challenges, Trump's attorney, Alina Habba, remained optimistic about the outcome, expressing confidence in overturning the debt.
In response to the situation, Trump criticized the bond set by the judge, labeling it as 'unconstitutional, un-American, unprecedented, and practically impossible for any company to fulfill.'
