Trump is poised to owe more than $500 million in penalties due to New York Democratic Attorney General Letitia James‘s civil fraud case and two defamation lawsuits brought by former Elle magazine columnist E. Jean Carroll.

Without speaking about the nearly $500 million civil fraud case she brought against Trump, James made general comments about Trump’s election victory on Wednesday, saying New York is “prepared to fight back” if Trump made any attempts at “revenge or retribution” in light of the case against him.

“I am ready to do everything in my power to ensure our state and nation do not go backwards,” she said in a statement. “Together with Governor Hochul, our partners in state and local government, and my colleague attorneys general from throughout the nation, we will work each and every day to defend Americans, no matter what this new administration throws at us.”

Trump’s legal counsel has already been fighting back for months against the judgments handed to him in the Carroll cases, which surrounded Trump’s denial that he sexually assaulted her in the mid-1990s, and James’s accusations that the Trump Organization inflated its asset values to obtain favorable loans and insurance premiums.

A federal appeals court is weighing Trump’s appeal to dismiss the first Carroll verdict that found him liable for defamation when he, as president, issued a direct denial that he raped her in the mid-1990s, as she claims. A jury found Trump liable for defamation and sexual assault and awarded Carroll $5 million. Appeals judges are still considering Trump’s bid to overturn that judgment.

Whether Trump is successful with the appeal in the first Carroll case may signal what could happen in her second defamation case, which awarded the columnist a whopping $83 million for Trump’s comments about her after he left office in 2021.

In September, a state appeals court heard arguments in Trump’s efforts to dismiss the hefty civil fraud judgment against him, amounting to nearly $500 million due to accruing interest, after state Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron determined his adult sons and his family business were liable for inflating the value of the Trump Organization’s assets.

The five-judge appeals court appeared open to some of Trump’s arguments during the hearing, and a decision is still pending there. Trump still has the ability to file an additional appeal to New York’s highest appellate court if he does not succeed at reducing or wiping away the full penalty.

Neama Rahmani, a former federal prosecutor, said he believes the appeals court could have the “judgment amount reduced, but I don’t think it’s going to get the judgment reversed entirely.”

The former prosecutor added that Trump’s likely best arguments to the appeals judges may include that no banks suffered any injuries or losses because of Trump’s business and that some of the damages calculated by Engoron could be outside the scope of the statute of limitations.

Historical precedent suggests that Trump could still be facing these civil cases while he is a sitting president, unlike the federal criminal cases, which are barred by the Justice Department’s long-standing policy.

The Supreme Court ruled in 1997 that sitting presidents could not invoke presidential immunity to avoid civil litigation while in office. The decision stemmed from a lawsuit in which then-President Bill Clinton was involved.

Trump is also facing civil lawsuits in Washington, D.C., brought by Democratic lawmakers and others over his alleged role in the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. 

The lawsuits by the Democratic lawmakers and some individual police officers said Trump should be liable for civil damages for harm they say they suffered during the riot. Two court decisions in December cleared the way for civil suits against Trump, who had argued that he was immune to them.

The incoming president is likely to be let off the hook for the criminal indictment surrounding the Jan. 6 riot, in addition to the criminal classified documents case, as special counsel Jack Smith’s office has pointed to long-standing Justice Department policy that precludes criminal prosecutions against a sitting president.

Meanwhile, legal experts are split as to whether Trump will face sentencing in New York over a separate criminal case in which a Manhattan jury found him guilty of 34 felony counts for falsifying business records related to efforts to conceal a hush money payment to a porn star ahead of the 2016 election.

Experts say a variety of outcomes could arise ahead of sentencing, as Judge Juan Merchan is also planning to rule by Nov. 12 on whether the Supreme Court’s July 1 presidential immunity ruling should result in throwing out the case. Trump has said Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office incorrectly used evidence from Trump’s time as president in the case.

Rahmani said he believes sentencing might still happen if Merchan does not rule in Trump’s favor to dismiss the case in light of the immunity decision but said that any punishment, such as home confinement or prison, remains a logistical nightmare that seems improbable.

“Logistically, home confinement with Secret Service protection just doesn’t even make any sense. They’re Class E felonies. It’s gonna be fine. That’s it,” Rahmani said.