Connect with us

Politics

New York appeals court judges in Trump case routinely donated to Democrats, records show

Published

on

New York appeals court judges in Trump case routinely donated to Democrats, records show

Join Fox News for access to this content

You have reached your maximum number of articles. Log in or create an account FREE of charge to continue reading.

By entering your email and pushing continue, you are agreeing to Fox News’ Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive.

Please enter a valid email address.

Having trouble? Click here.

The New York state court that will decide former President Trump’s appeal includes justices who have a history of donating to Democrat campaigns and were elected to lower court judgeships as Democrat candidates before their appointments to the appellate court.

State campaign records show that some of the justices, when they served as judges in the lower courts, donated to Democrat candidates and campaign committees, an apparent violation of the New York State Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics rules that prohibit partisan political activities of sitting judges.

Advertisement

The list of candidates from the justices’ history of political donations includes a wide variety of New York elected officials, from state legislature candidates to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

50 REASONS WHY $70 MILLION-PLUS IN SMALL DONATIONS POURED IN AFTER TRUMP VERDICT

A review of federal and state election contribution records reveals that at least 14 of the 21 justices gave individual donations to Democrat campaigns and committees before their appointment to the court. Fox News could find no evidence of any donations by the justices to the New York state Republican, Conservative or Liberal parties or their candidates.

Marsha Michael, Ellen Gesmer, Jeffrey Oing and Leticia James

The justices serve on the New York State Appellate Court, First Judicial Department, and will eventually hear the anticipated appeal from the former president’s lawyers of his conviction last Thursday on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records.

Advertisement

All but one of the court’s 21 justices were appointed by a New York Democrat governor, either David Patterson, Andrew Cuomo or Kathy Hochul. The sole justice put on the bench by a Republican, New York Gov. George Pataki, is Associate Justice David Friedman, who is the longest-serving justice since his appointment 25 years ago.

Before his elevation to the court, Friedman was the Democrat, Republican and Conservative party candidate for Supreme Court justice in his judgeship election in 2011. In an appellate court’s ruling during Trump’s real estate fraud trial last year, Friedman sided with the former president.

One justice who did not side with Trump is the newest member of the appellate panel, Associate Justice Marsha D. Michael. She was appointed by Hochul last October.

On April 19, three days before opening arguments were scheduled to begin in Trump’s recently completed criminal trial in front of State Supreme Court Judge Juan Merchan, Michael rejected a last-minute bid by Trump’s lawyers to stop the proceedings. Her ruling gave the green light for the trial that eventually convicted Trump to proceed.

In 2014, Michael ran in the Democrat primary for the New York State Assembly in the 79th District in the Bronx. She was endorsed in that race by then-New York City Public Advocate Leticia James, who went on to be elected New York attorney general four years later. Last year, James prosecuted Trump and won her successful $454 million real estate fraud case. 

Advertisement

Back when Michael was stumping for the state legislature, James appeared with her on the campaign trail.

On July 11, 2014, Michael answered questions about her candidacy from the nonpartisan good government group Citizens Union.

She was asked if she supported a “merit-based appointment system through creation of a commission for the selection of judges in all of New York’s trial courts.”

The justice did not support the idea that all judges should be chosen on the merits, writing, “I don’t think all courts should solely be merit-based.”

Michael lost the Democrat primary race despite having the backing of the Bronx Democrat organization. She remained on the ballot in the general election as the candidate of the Working Families Party. The WFP is known today for supporting members of the so-called “Squad” in Congress, backing Reps. Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, Cori Bush and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, among others.

Advertisement

Four years after her defeat, Michael ran again as a Democrat candidate for a New York State Supreme Court seat and won in 2018. It was from that position that she was elevated to the Appellate Division eight months ago.

Appellate Court Justice Ellen Gesmer was first elected as a judge in the New York State Civil Court in 2004. In 2011, she won a Supreme Court judgeship as both the Democrat and Republican candidate. Before Gesmer was elected to the bench, records show that she had donated thousands of dollars to Democrats.

Former President Trump arrives at Trump Tower in New York City on May 30, 2024, after being found guilty on 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree. (Felipe Ramales for Fox News Digital)

Federal Election Commission records show that Gesmer contributed to the campaigns of Hillary Clinton, Sen. Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, and various Democratic Party committees when she was a lawyer in private practice.

In 1998, she donated a total of $2,000 to Schumer’s election bid, a total of $1,725 to Hillary Clinton’s 2000 New York state Senate race, $1,700 to the New York State Democratic Committee and the Democratic National Committee, and in 2003, she chipped in $250 to support Dean’s presidential campaign.

Advertisement

Appellate Justice Jeffrey K. Oing gave $900 to the New York State Democratic Committee in three payments in 2003, according to FEC records, one year before he was elected to the New York City Civil Court.

The records from the New York State Board of Elections, which detail contributions to state-level races, reveal the extent of political donations made by judges during their election campaigns.

The range of donations includes contributions to Democrat New York state Senate and Assembly candidates, party committees and local Democrat clubhouses, even as some of the judges served on the bench.

The state’s judicial ethics rules state: “Neither a sitting judge nor a candidate for public election to judicial office shall directly or indirectly engage in any political activity” that does not directly involve their own candidacy. The rules prohibit judges from “engaging in any partisan political activity” or “participating in any political campaign.”

REP JORDAN URGES CONGRESS TO ‘DEFUND LAWFARE ACTIVITIES’ OF TRUMP PROSECUTORS

Advertisement

Trump has accused Merchan of being “conflicted” because he donated $15 to President Biden’s 2016 election campaign and $10 to a group called Stop Republicans. In addition, Merchan’s daughter works for a political campaign consulting firm whose clients include many prominent Democrats, including Biden’s campaign.

The New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct found that Merchan had no conflict of interest but did reportedly give him a warning over his contributions.

In the murky political landscape that can be New York politics, several of the appellate judges were even endorsed by competing political parties in their contests for a seat on the lower courts.

Appellate Justice Troy Webber first won her race for Supreme Court justice in 2002 as both the Democrat and Republican candidate. In 2016, she was on the ballot as the Democrat candidate, according to New York state election records. Justice Barbara Kapnick won in 2001 as the Democrat, Republican and Liberal party candidate. By 2015, she carried the banner for just the Democrats.

Former President Trump headlines a Republican National Committee spring donor retreat in Palm Beach, Florida, on May 4, 2024. (Donald Trump 2024 campaign)

Advertisement

Despite some of the justices’ past Democrat support, Trump has scored some wins before the appellate court in his recent appeals.

Last year, a panel of five of the justices reduced the amount of the bond that was imposed by Judge Arthur Engoron in Trump’s real estate civil fraud trial from $454 million to $175 million.

Friedman temporarily blocked Engoron’s gag order on Trump, and Justice Anil Singh granted a stay that temporarily lifted Engoron’s ruling that barred Trump and his sons, Donald Jr. and Eric, from doing business in New York.

Court observers note that there is no evidence that the personal political views of the jurists have influenced their rulings, but critics contend that the appearance of a possible conflict of interest is troubling.

Advertisement

Fox News asked the appellate court for comment but no one has responded.

Fox News’ Courtney De George contributed to this report.

Politics

Video: Senate Republicans Block Limits to Trump’s War Powers

Published

on

Video: Senate Republicans Block Limits to Trump’s War Powers

new video loaded: Senate Republicans Block Limits to Trump’s War Powers

transcript

transcript

Senate Republicans Block Limits to Trump’s War Powers

Senate Republicans voted against a Democratic bill that would have required President Trump to obtain congressional authorization to continue waging war against Iran.

“The yeas are 47. The nays are 53. The motion to discharge is not approved.” “President Trump decided to attack Iran. That decision was profound, deliberate and correct. The president understands the weight of war.” “Why is Donald Trump hellbent on making history repeat itself? Why is he plunging America headfirst into a war that Americans do not want, and which he cannot even explain? The American people deserve a say, and that is what our resolution is about.”

Advertisement
Senate Republicans voted against a Democratic bill that would have required President Trump to obtain congressional authorization to continue waging war against Iran.

By Shawn Paik

March 5, 2026

Continue Reading

Politics

DHS defends McLaughlin against allegations husband’s company profited millions from ad contracts: ‘Baseless’

Published

on

DHS defends McLaughlin against allegations husband’s company profited millions from ad contracts: ‘Baseless’

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

EXCLUSIVE: Newly obtained financial statements shed light on claims that former Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin’s husband’s company made millions from a DHS advertising campaign.

DHS Secretary Kristi Noem faced intense questioning during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday, and Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., specifically called out the agency for contracting a public relations firm headed by McLaughlin’s husband, Benjamin Yoho.

“I have personally reviewed the allegations against Ms. McLaughlin, and I find them to be baseless,” DHS General Counsel James Percival told Fox News Digital. “Nothing illegal or unethical occurred with respect to these contracts. Ms. McLaughlin was not involved in selecting any subcontractors.

“She is, however, a superstar in the public affairs world, so I am not surprised that she married a successful businessman whose services were attractive to these outside firms.”

Advertisement

Newly obtained financial statements address allegations that former Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin’s husband’s firm improperly profited from a multimillion-dollar DHS ad campaign. Lawmakers pressed Secretary Kristi Noem over the contracts during a heated Senate hearing. (Jack Gruber/USA Today)

Kennedy alleged that Yoho’s firm, The Strategy Group, “got most of the money” out of what the Louisiana Republican senator says was $220 million in “television advertisements that feature [Noem] prominently.”

“I’m sorry,” Kennedy said. “Safe America Media was a company formed 11 days before you picked them. And that the Strategy Group got most of the money. And the head of that is married to your former spokesperson.”

“It’s just hard for me to believe knowing the president as I do, that you said, ‘Mr. President, here’s some ads I’ve cut, and I’m going to spend $220 million running them,’ that he would have agreed to that,” Kennedy explained. “I don’t think Russ Vought at OMB [Office of Management and Budget] would have agreed to that.”

‘YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED!’: PROTESTER DRAGGED FROM KRISTI NOEM’S SENATE HEARING

Advertisement

Senate scrutiny intensified over a DHS advertising campaign after Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., questioned whether a firm linked to McLaughlin’s husband benefited unfairly. DHS officials and the company deny any wrongdoing or multimillion-dollar profits. (Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

The Strategy Group is a conservative advertising agency for which Yoho serves as CEO.

Figures obtained by Fox News Digital show a slightly lesser total advertising expenditure of approximately $185 million, with a total of roughly $146.5 million going to a campaign called “Save America.”

However, of the total that went to “Save America,” roughly $348,000 went to production costs, while the remaining $142 million went to “media buys.”

Sources at DHS say that media buys are the cost of actually buying the ads themselves, whether purchased from social media or for a TV ad.

Advertisement

Kennedy also alleged that the bidding process for the contracts never took place and that Safe America Media’s recent founding was a cause for concern and collusion between McLaughlin and her husband’s business. 

WATCH THE MOST VIRAL MOMENTS AS KRISTI NOEM’S HEARING GOES OFF THE RAILS

Debate over DHS’ “Save America” ad campaign intensified as senators challenged its costs and contractor ties, even as agency officials touted the initiative as a historic success in promoting self-deportation. (Graeme Sloan/Getty Images)

“Yes they did,” Noem responded during the hearing. “They went out to a competitive bid, and career officials at the department chose who would do those advertising commercials.”

The Strategy Group posted to X Tuesday that it never had a contract with the department. While it did receive several hundred thousand dollars for production costs associated with the advertising campaigns, The Strategy Group never made millions.

Advertisement

“The Strategy Group has never had a contract with DHS,” the post said. “We had a subcontract with Safe America [Media] for limited production services. Safe America paid us $226,137.17 total for 5 film shoots, 45 produced video advertisements and 6 produced radio advertisements.

DHS SPOKESWOMAN TRICIA MCLAUGHLIN TO LEAVE TRUMP ADMIN, SOURCE CONFIRMS

Critics raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest in a high-dollar DHS advertising effort, but department representatives say McLaughlin recused herself and that subcontracting decisions were made independently. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana, File)

“If you’re going to try to question our integrity, bring actual evidence — we did,” the post concluded.

Because these ads were purchased using public funds, all contract totals are publicly available. 

Advertisement

Lauren Bis, who took up the role of assistant secretary once McLaughlin left office, told Fox News Digital Tuesday that scrutiny from Republicans and Democrats over the advertising spending was unjustified because the campaigns resulted in “the most successful ad campaign in U.S. history.”

“Sanctuary politicians are attacking this ad campaign because it has been successful in CLOSING our borders and getting more than 2.2 million illegal aliens to LEAVE the U.S.,” Bis said. 

“The DHS domestic and international ad campaign was the most successful ad campaign in U.S. history. The results speak for themselves: 2.2 million illegal aliens self-deported, and we now have the most secure border in American history.”

KRISTI NOEM TO FACE SENATE GRILLING OVER MINNEAPOLIS SHOOTINGS AS DHS SHUTDOWN HITS WEEK 3

The Trump administration reaffirmed that all illegal immigrants are eligible for deportations as they focus on arresting violent criminals first.  (Raquel Natalicchio/Houston Chronicle via Getty Images)

Advertisement

Bis also compared the cost of arresting and deporting an illegal migrant to that of the minimal cost of an illegal migrant self-deporting. The department says the advertising campaign played a key role in marketing self-deportation.

A spokesperson at DHS also told Fox News Digital that contractors decide who they hire, fulfilling the terms of a contract, not the department itself. 

“By law, DHS cannot and does not determine, control or weigh in on who contractors hire or use to fulfill the terms of the contract,” a DHS spokesperson told Fox. “Those decisions are made by the contractor alone. We have only become aware of these companies because of this inquiry and did not hire those companies.”

The spokesperson also noted that McLaughlin “recused herself” from interactions with subcontractors to avoid “any perceived appearance of impropriety.”

“Upon hearing who the subcontractors were for production of the ad, Ms. McLaughlin recused herself from any interaction or engagement with any subcontractors to avoid any perceived appearance of impropriety,” the spokesperson continued. “DHS Office of Public Affairs is the program officer. Ms. McLaughlin oversees the DHS Office of Public Affairs, which is simply the vehicle for this contract.”

Advertisement

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem takes her seat as she arrives to testify during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. (Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images)

McLaughlin told Fox News Digital the criticism of her and her family by senators at the hearing is a matter of public manipulation.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“This is yet another example of politicians intentionally trying to dupe and manipulate the public to try to manufacture division and anger,” McLaughlin told Fox News Digital. “The ad spend and contracts are a matter of public record, and the process was done by the book.

“These politicians would rather smear private citizens and American small businesses than do any basic research.”

Advertisement

Fox News Digital’s Alexandra Koch contributed to this report.

Related Article

DHS defends ad blitz amid Senate scrutiny, says campaign drove 2.2M self-deportations and saved taxpayers $39B
Continue Reading

Politics

Senate rejects war powers measure to withdraw forces from Iran

Published

on

Senate rejects war powers measure to withdraw forces from Iran

Senate Republicans blocked a war powers resolution Wednesday designed to withdraw U.S. forces from hostilities in Iran, as the Trump administration accelerates its military campaign in a conflict that has killed hundreds, including at least six American service members.

The motion failed in a vote of 47-53.

In addition to pulling out military resources from the Middle East, the measure — introduced by Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Tim Kaine (D-Va.) — would have required Congress’ explicit approval before future engagement with Iran, a power granted to the legislative branch in the Constitution.

The House, where Republicans also hold an advantage, is scheduled to weigh in on a similar measure Thursday. Even if both Democratic-led measures were to succeed, President Trump was widely expected to veto the legislation.

“We are doing very well on the war front, to put it mildly,” President Trump said at a White House event on Wednesday afternoon. The president, who has come under scrutiny for offering shifting explanations on the war’s endgame, said that if he was asked to scale the American military operation from one to 10, he would rate it a 15.

Advertisement

Democrats dispute that Trump possesses the authority to wage the ongoing operation in Iran without explicit congressional approval.

Acknowledging the measure was unlikely to succeed, they framed the vote as a strategy to force lawmakers to put their support for or opposition to the war on record.

“Today every senator — every single one — will pick a side,” Schumer said. “Do you stand with the American people who are exhausted with forever wars in the Middle East, or stand with Donald Trump and Pete Hegseth as they bumble us headfirst into another war?”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and most of his Republican colleagues have maintained that the president carried out a “pre-emptive” and “defensive” strike in Iran, giving him full authority to continue unilateral military operations.

Republicans saw the vote as the “last roadblock” stopping Trump from carrying out his mission against the Islamic Republic.

Advertisement

“I think the president has the authority that he needs to conduct the activities and operations that are currently underway there. There are a lot of controversy and questions around the war powers act, but I think the president is acting in the best interest of the nation and our national security interests,” Thune said at a news conference.

Senators largely held to party loyalties, with the exception of Kentucky Republican Rand Paul, who broke ranks to support the measure, and Pennsylvania Democrat John Fetterman, who opposed it.

The vote comes as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Wednesday that the war against Iran is “accelerating,” with American and Israeli forces expanding air operations into Iranian territory. He pointed to evidence released by U.S. Central Command of a submarine strike on an Iranian warship, and also lauded other strikes throughout the region as civilian casualties in Iran surpassed 1,000 on the fourth day of the conflict, according to rights groups.

“We’re going to continue to do well,” Trump said Wednesday. “We have the greatest military in the world by far and that was a tremendous threat to us for many years. Forty-seven years they’ve been killing our people and killing people all over the world, and we have great support.”

Republicans blocked a similar war powers vote in January after the president ordered U.S. special forces to capture and extradite Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in Caracas on drug trafficking charges.

Advertisement

GOP leaders argued that the outcome of that mission equated to a quick success in the Middle East, despite an uncertain timeline from the Department of Defense.

In the House, lawmakers will vote on a separate war powers effort Thursday. That bill is led by Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), the two lawmakers who authored the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

“Instead of sending billions overseas, we need to invest in jobs, healthcare, and education here,” Khanna said on X.

In addition to that proposal, moderate Democrats in the House have introduced a separate resolution that would give the administration a 30-day window to justify continued hostilities in the Middle East before requiring a formal declaration of war or authorization from Congress.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending