Trump launches new attacks on Engoron, James

Former President Trump launched new attacks Monday against New York Attorney General Letitia James (D) and Judge Arthur Engoron, the judge overseeing his civil fraud trial in the Empire State.

“Remember, the corrupt and radical Judge Engoron is a political hack who wouldn’t give us a Jury, wouldn’t let this ‘case’ go to the Commercial Division, where it belongs (would have been TERMINATED), incredibly ignored the Appellate Court decision that struck down almost 90% of this fake lawsuit based on Statute of Limitations, etc., and, Illegally and Unconstitutionally Gagged me and my lawyers, in a brazen and blatant attempt to prevent us from bringing vital information to the Public and the Courts,” Trump posted to Truth Social.

The former president also called James “racist” and labeled Engoron “the [r]unaway judge.” He said the two are “causing grave damage to our Justice System, to New York State, and to the United States of America!”

---

Stories to read next from The Hill

• Haley super PAC fires back at Trump with New Hampshire ad
• Senate Republicans recoil at Trump ‘poisoning the blood of our country’ remarks
• Cheney urges Fox viewers to ditch Trump 
• Trump draws Nazi comparisons — and Biden counterattack — with immigration rhetoric

---

Last week, a New York appeals court upheld a gag order imposed on Trump that prevented him from attacking court staff in the civil fraud trial. The gag order came about in the wake of Trump going after a clerk of Engoron, falsely labeling her as the “girlfriend” of Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.).

“Here, the gravity of potential harm is small, given that the Gag Order is narrow, limited to prohibiting solely statements regarding the court’s staff,” the court wrote in its opinion upholding the order.

Engoron had noted that his staff was “inundated” with threats after the comments by Trump. He also later broadened the gag order to include the former president’s attorneys, following their questioning of communications he made with his staff.

“My law clerks are public servants who are performing their job in the manner in which I request,” he wrote in the order.

“This includes providing legal authority and opinions, as well as responding to questions I pose to them. Plainly, defenders are not entitled to the confidential communications among me and my court staff.”