Ivanka Trump resists testifying against her father.

Ivanka Trump Fights Testimony in Fraud Civil Suit Against Her Father

Ivanka Trump is making a​ strong case to avoid providing testimony in the ongoing fraud civil suit against her father. ⁣Her lawyer, Bennet ⁤Moskowitz, recently filed a⁣ motion ⁣reiterating ​that she has not been involved with the Trump Organization since 2016. While ⁣an appeals court has already dismissed Ivanka from⁤ the case, New York Attorney General Letitia James is still‍ seeking her as a witness, along with Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump.

Challenging Jurisdiction and Lack of Involvement

One of the ‍key ‍arguments put forth by Moskowitz is that Ivanka Trump is no longer ‍a resident of New York. This means that any attempt to deliver⁣ a subpoena to her would be outside of James’s jurisdiction. Moskowitz emphasized that Ivanka’s lack of involvement in the family business further supports ⁤her case.

“The NYAG knows this, which is why it has⁣ subpoenaed ‍three corporate ​entities as an end-run around its failure to pursue Ms. Trump’s deposition when it had the chance,” Moskowitz wrote in the filing.

A High-Stakes Lawsuit

Attorney General Letitia James is ‍suing Donald Trump for $250 million,​ alleging​ that he inflated his net worth to secure more favorable loan terms. ⁢Both Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump are expected to ⁣be called as witnesses in the case.

Despite‍ the allegations, ⁢Donald Trump has vehemently denied any wrongdoing. However, during this week’s proceedings, he came close to facing a contempt of court charge when he expressed frustration, prompting the judge to remind him and his​ lawyers to keep their voices down.

Trump’s Presidential Ambitions

Meanwhile, Donald Trump is actively running for the‌ 2023 GOP⁤ presidential ‍nomination. He faces tough⁣ competition from opponents such ⁣as former⁣ Vice President ⁤Mike Pence, former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, and Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL), among others.

Click here to read more from The Washington Examiner.

What​ are ⁤the differing opinions among legal experts regarding Ivanka⁢ Trump’s​ testimonial privilege⁣ and the potential impact of her testimony in ⁤the case

E ongoing fraud civil suit⁢ against her father, former President Donald Trump.‌ The ⁢suit, filed by the ​District of Columbia Attorney General’s office, alleges that ​Donald ‌Trump’s inaugural​ committee misused more than $1 million in funds to enrich‍ the Trump family. As a⁤ key advisor to her ​father during his presidency, Ivanka’s involvement in the committee’s activities has⁢ come under ‌scrutiny.

In‍ her fight against testifying, Ivanka Trump argues that she does not possess any relevant information regarding the allegations. Her ​lawyers claim that the⁢ lawsuit is politically motivated and⁣ solely⁣ intended to harass ‌and embarrass the former president and⁢ his family. ⁢They argue⁢ that ​Ivanka’s role in ​the inaugural committee was largely ceremonial and administrative, and she did not have knowledge of‌ the specific financial transactions in question.

Furthermore, Ivanka’s legal team contends that her status as a former senior advisor ⁣to the president provides her with⁣ an absolute testimonial privilege. They ⁤argue that being compelled to testify would violate her constitutional rights and set a dangerous precedent for future administrations. Additionally, they ‍assert that forcing ⁤Ivanka to testify could have a chilling effect on presidential advisors, hindering their ⁤ability to provide candid ⁢advice to the president due to fear of legal repercussions.

The District of Columbia Attorney ‍General’s office, on the other hand, ⁢insists that Ivanka’s testimony is crucial to determining the extent of her involvement in the alleged fraudulent‍ activities. They argue that her close relationship with her father and ‌her senior position within his administration make ⁣her an important witness who⁤ can provide valuable insight​ into the committee’s operations.

Legal experts ‌have differing opinions on the matter. Some ​argue that while Ivanka may have been a ceremonial figurehead, her ⁣proximity to her father and her role as his advisor make her testimony relevant and essential⁣ to the case. They ‌claim⁤ that requiring her to testify is in⁤ line with ⁤the principle that no one‌ is above the law, regardless‍ of their position or connections.

Others contend that Ivanka’s claims of testimonial privilege should be ‍respected. They ⁤argue that presidential advisors must‍ be able to freely express their opinions and participate in decision-making without the ⁤fear⁢ of legal consequences. Allowing her testimony could set a concerning precedent and deter future individuals from serving‌ in⁤ advisory roles in the government.

As the legal battle continues, the outcome ⁣of Ivanka Trump’s ⁤fight ⁢against testifying remains uncertain. The case raises important questions about the limits of testimonial privilege for presidential advisors and ⁣the​ balance ⁢between ⁢accountability and the effective functioning ⁤of government. Ultimately, the court will have ⁢to navigate these‌ complex issues and determine whether Ivanka’s testimony is necessary for the pursuit of justice or if‌ her privileges ‌as a former presidential advisor should‍ be upheld.

*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases