South Carolina, along with 14 other states, is supporting former President Donald Trump in his efforts to challenge a New York court order requiring him to pay over $454 million for allegedly inflating the value of his assets and properties. Earlier this year, state Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron ruled that Trump was liable for submitting false financial statements to banks and insurers to secure more favorable loan and insurance rates. The total amount Trump is ordered to pay, including pre-judgment interest, is approximately $454 million. He has appealed this decision to New York’s intermediate appellate court.
“Our brief isn’t about Donald Trump, it’s about upholding the rule of law and the Constitution,” South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson said in a statement on Friday. “We argue that this award is an excessive fine under the Eighth Amendment and also violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.” The brief added: “The approximately $355 million disgorgement against President Trump was an excessive fine under the Eighth Amendment.”
Furthermore, the coalition of states’ brief argued that it is universally “undisputed that defendants have made all required [loan] payments on time,” and pointed out that Trump’s alleged misconduct did not directly financially harm the banks or insurance companies. The brief, filed by 15 GOP-led states, comes as other Republican attorneys general have expressed their support for Trump as he contends with four criminal cases and additional civil cases amidst the 2024 election.
Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey is seeking to petition the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene in Trump’s separate criminal case in the New York borough of Manhattan. This comes after Trump was convicted on 34 counts of falsifying business records to hide hush money payments given to a porn star before the 2016 presidential election. Bailey has stated that constituents in his state are being “denied access” to Trump as a candidate due to a restrictive gag order imposed on the former president in the hush money case. He has also called for Trump’s mid-September sentencing date to be postponed until after the November 5 presidential election.
Last week, New York Attorney General Letitia James responded to Bailey’s effort at the Supreme Court, telling the justices that “Trump has already raised, and the New York state courts are already adjudicating, the same issues Missouri seeks to raise,” calling Missouri’s claims “patently meritless.” James campaigned in 2018 on a platform of ‘getting Trump.’
It is uncertain whether and to what extent New York’s intermediate appellate court will take the multistate effort into account in Trump’s appeal of the civil fraud judgment. The appeals court may consider the case as early as September when its fall term begins. Moreover, legal experts have indicated that Missouri’s attempt to sue New York is likely a long shot, as states generally lack the authority to intervene in another state’s criminal justice matters.
