Manhattan judge denies Trump’s bid for mistrial: ‘Utterly without merit’

A Manhattan judge Friday said Donald Trump’s bid for a mistrial in his $250 million civil fraud case is “utterly without merit” and rejected arguments that the jurist’s law clerk is co-judging.

Trump, 77, filed a motion for mistrial Wednesday, claiming there was “overwhelming” bias by Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron in his fraud case and that the judge’s principal law clerk, Allison Greenfield, has had improper sway on the proceedings.

Greenfield has been seen whispering into the judge’s ear and passing him notes throughout the seven weeks of trial so far.

“As I have made clear over the course of this trial, my rulings are mine and mine alone. There is absolutely no ‘co-judging’ at play,” Engoron wrote in a decision Friday.

The former president’s lawyers claimed that the fact that Engoron sent out articles about the case in a college newsletter on multiple occasions and that Greenfield made political contributions to Democratic groups — including ones supporting New York Attorney General Letitia James, who is prosecuting the case — were improper and further evidence of the pair’s bias against Trump.

But Engoron countered that he had no involvement in writing the news articles that he sent in an email newsletter. He noted that he co-founded the Wheatley School Alumni Association and said it’s “gratifying” for him to help other alumni stay “connect and informed” with the emails.

“None of this has anything to do with, much less does it interfere with, my presiding fairly, impartially, and professionally over the instant dispute, which I have now been doing for more than three years, and which I intend to do until its conclusion,” he said in his ruling.

Engoron said Trump’s arguments that Greenfield’s political contributions exceeded the legal limit were “a red herring.”

Since Greenfield was running for a judicial seat at the time, most of the money was for the cost of tickets to attend political functions, which can be subtracted from her donations and which puts the contributions “well below the ethical and legal permissible annual limit,” Engoron said.

As for any alleged biased rulings from Engoron throughout trial, the judge said the accusations were also “without merit,” adding, “I stand by each and every ruling, and they speak for themselves.”

Trump lawyer Alina Habba criticized Friday’s ruling but said it didn’t come as a surprise.

“As expected, today the court refused to take responsibility for its failure to preside over this case in an impartial and unbiased manner,” Habba said. “We, however, remain undeterred and will continue to fight for our clients’ right to a fair trial.”

The topic of Greenfield has repeatedly been brought up during trial, and Trump even posted about the law clerk, prompting Engoron to issue a limited gag order barring Trump and his lawyers from speaking about his court staff in public.

Engoron has also fined Trump $15,000, finding that he twice violated the order. Trump is in the process of appealing the fine.

An appellate judge Thursday temporarily lifted the gag order, finding it could be an infringement on Trump’s constitutional right to free speech — a fact that Trump’s side says is all the more pressing since he’s the frontrunner GOP candidate in the 2024 presidential election.