Judge Arthur Engoron recently posted a scathing email exchange in which he gave former President Donald Trump explicit limits on — and eventually banned him from — delivering remarks at the close of his fraud trial.
Trump has been banned from personally making a closing argument at his New York civil fraud trial on Thursday because he would not agree to limitations on what he could say.
The trial in the fraud case brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James and presided over by Judge Engoron is hurtling toward its conclusion, with closing arguments set for Thursday, January 11, 2024 — at which Trump has been forbidden to speak.
On Wednesday, Judge Engoron released a chain of emails with Trump’s team detailing the discussions that led to his decision to put the kibosh on Trump’s closing.
From: Chris Kise
Sent: Thursday, January 4, 2024 12:47 PM
additionally, president trump plans to present argument at closing as well.
but we anticipate all such arguments will be completed within the above time estimate.
“From: Hon. Arthur Engoron
Date: Friday, January 5, 2024 at 1:18 PM Dear Counselors,
In the email to which this email responds, Mr. Kise announced that defendant Donald J. Trump “plans to present argument at closing.” Pursuant to CPLR 321, “If a party appears by attorney, such party may not act in person in the action except by consent of the court.” Mr. Trump obviously “appears by attorney.” Thus, and as far as my research has revealed, whether he may present a
closing argument is completely at my discretion.
Particularly in a non-jury trial, I am inclined to let everyone have his or her say. Moreover, the more reasoned analysis I receive, the better I will be able to decide the case correctly. Furthermore, Mr. Trump is the person with by far the most at stake in this enforcement action.
Thus, in my sole discretion, I will consent to let Mr. Trump make a closing argument if, and only if, through counsel by 1/9/2024, and by himself, personally, on the record, just before he speaks, he agrees to limit his subjects to what is permissible in a counsel’s closing argument, that is, commentary on the relevant, material facts that are in evidence, and application of the relevant law to those facts. He may not seek to introduce new evidence. He may not “testify.” He may not comment on irrelevant matters. In particular, and without limitation, he may not deliver a campaign speech, and he may not impugn myself, my staff, plaintiff, plaintiff’s staff, or the New York State Court System, none of which is relevant to this case, and all of which, except commenting on my staff, can be done, and is being done, in other forums. If Mr. Trump violates any of these rules, I will not hesitate to cut him off in mid-sentence and admonish him. If he continues to violate the rules, I will end his closing argument and prevent him from making any further statements in the courtroom. If he violates the current gag order against him, I will immediately direct court officers to remove him from the courtroom forthwith and will fine him not less than $50,000. Finally, he must state on the record before he begins to speak that he also understands that, without exception, defendants, collectively, have only from 10:15 to 12:45, with one 15-minute break, to present their arguments, meaning that whatever time he speaks is time that other defense attorneys will not have.
Plaintiff will also have two hours and 15 minutes, from 2:15 to 4:30, to present closing arguments. Mr. Kise, please respond.
Justice Engoron”
