There's a lot going on in my friend and co-blogger Steve Calabresi's post below about Judge Engoron's ruling in the civil case brought against Donald Trump and his business entities. I don't want to respond to all of it. And I don't have a particular view of whether it was wise for the New York Attorney General to bring the case. But I'm also not sure of what specifically is legally reversible about Judge Engoron's ruling.
I want to start with a big-picture idea that Steve raises, which I have seen widely repeated, that the case against Trump is illegitimate because Trump's actions were (as Steve puts it) "a victimless crime." On this thinking, the banks that lent money to Trump weren't harmed by Trump's lies. Maybe lies are just how rough-and-tumble New Yorkers do business. As Steve claims, "is apparently standard practice in the New York State real estate market where borrowers often overstate the value of their assets." And if the banks that gave him loans had their loans repaid, what is the harm?
In thinking about this question, I think it helps to say a bit about the New York law at issue. Here's my understanding (and I hope readers will correct me if I'm wrong). Under New York law, you need to register businesses with the state. The registration is effectively a license to do business. And one of the state Attorney General's 16 statutory duties is to bring an action in equity against businesses that "engage in repeated fraudulent or illegal acts or otherwise demonstrate persistent fraud or illegality in the carrying on, conducting or transaction of business." The action in equity asks for injunctive relief, "enjoining the continuance of such business activity or of any fraudulent or illegal acts, directing restitution and damages and, in an appropriate case, cancelling any [business] certificate filed[.]"
