Trump lawyers detail document hunt in contempt ruling fight
NEW YORK (AP) — Donald Trump’s legal team wants to void a contempt ruling and $10,000-per-day fine against the former president over a subpoena for documents related to a New York civil investigation into his business dealings, saying they’ve conducted a detailed search for the relevant files.
A new, 66-page court filing dated Friday describes Trump’s lawyers’ efforts to produce documents sought by New York Attorney General Letitia James’s office, which is probing whether Trump may have misstated the value of assets like skyscrapers and golf courses on financial statements for over a decade.
Trump has called the investigation a political witch hunt and recently called James, who is Black, “racist” and said the courts were “biased, unyielding, and totally unfair.”
Last week, a New York appellate judge rejected his bid to suspend the fine while Trump appeals the decision.
In the recent court filing, Trump attorney Alina Habba said the responses to the subpoena were complete and correct and that no relevant documents or information were withheld.
Habba conducted searches of Trump’s offices and private quarters at his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey, and his residence in Mar-a-Lago, Florida, according to the filing, but didn’t find any relevant documents that hadn’t already been produced. The filing also detailed searches of other locations including file cabinets and storage areas at the Trump Organization’s offices in New York.
In a separate sworn affidavit included with the filing, Trump stated there aren’t any relevant documents that haven’t already been produced.
He added that he owns two cellphones: an iPhone for personal use that he submitted in March to be searched as part of the subpoena, then submitted again in May; plus a second phone he was recently given that’s only used to post on Truth Social, the social media network he started after his ban from Twitter, Facebook and other platforms.
In a previous court ruling, Habba called the contempt ruling and fine “unconscionable and indefensible.”