Politics
Legal experts weigh in on Trump’s options after failure to secure $464M appeal bond: ‘uncharted territory’
Legal experts are weighing in on Donald Trump’s options after attorneys for the former president said he has not been able to secure a $464 million appeal bond he needs following a New York civil fraud judgment against him.
Trump’s lawyers wrote in a Monday court filing that obtaining the nearly half-a-billion appeal was a “practical impossibility under the circumstances presented.”
David Gelman, a criminal defense attorney and a former deputy district attorney, called the judgment a “unicorn.” He argued that the judge should give Trump a lot more leeway to satisfy the bond because “not even the richest man in the world has $464 million lying around.”
Former US President and Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump speaks during a Buckeye Values PAC Rally in Vandalia, Ohio, on March 16, 2024. (KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI/AFP via Getty Images)
A New York Appeals Court judge denied Trump’s request late last month to delay payment of the $464 million owed as a result of the lawsuit brought by New York State Attorney General Letitia James, but said he would temporarily allow the 2024 front-runner and his sons to continue running their business during the appeals process.
A New York Appeals Court judge previously ruled that the former president must post a bond for the full amount of the judgment and that an independent director of compliance will be appointed.
That ruling comes after New York Judge Arthur Engoron handed down his decision earlier in February after a months-long trial beginning in October in which the former president was accused of inflating his assets and committing fraud in financial documents.
JAMES CARVILLE SAYS BIDEN CAMP RIGHT TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT BLACK VOTE: ‘IT IS A PROBLEM’
Engoron ruled that Trump and other defendants were liable for “persistent and repeated fraud,” “falsifying business records,” “issuing false financial statements,” “conspiracy to falsify false financial statements,” “insurance fraud” and “conspiracy to commit insurance fraud.”
Gelman told Fox News Digital that “everyone needs to realize how unprecedented this is.”
“There has never been a judgment of this magnitude against a company or individual in the history of New York, so we are really in uncharted territory.”
New York Attorney General Letitia James speaks during a news conference, Sept. 21, 2022, in New York. (AP Photo/Brittainy Newman, File)
Gelman said Trump has three options: not appeal, ask the court to allow Attorney General James to use his property as collateral, or take it to a federal court and say the New York law is unconstitutional on its face.
“Courts really don’t deny bonds when there are other ways to pay. Again, because this is so unprecedented, and I don’t care how rich you are, nobody has that much liquid cash. So if a court had the option to allow a defendant to use some other collateral to satisfy the bond, they will,” Gelman said.
He added that there was no reason for the judge or Attorney General James to say no.
“You’re dealing with Trump. He’s not going anywhere. He’s the most famous and well known person in the world. It’s not like he can just disappear and can’t be found,” Gelman said.
NATHAN WADE CANCELS MAJOR IN-PERSON NETWORK INTERVIEW, CITING FAMILY EMERGENCY
Former federal prosecutor Andrew Cherkasky told Fox News’ The Story with Martha MacCallum that he “would not count Trump out yet.”
Cherkasky said that even if the court denies Trump’s appeal, he “still has paths to move forward through federal court – ultimately to the Supreme Court to complain about Eight Amendment violations.”
Per the Eighth Amendment, which deals with cruel and unusual punishment, “excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”
Laura Trump speaks at the NCGOP state convention with former U.S. President Donald Trump on June 5, 2021 in Greenville, North Carolina. (Melissa Sue Gerrits/Getty Images)
Cherkasky argued that the fines imposed on Trump were so “astronomically high here that it seems unbelievable for the Constitution to permit it under these circumstances.”
“I think – and I hope – that the New York Court of Appeals looks at it appropriately,” Cherkasky said. “But like I said, I think even the Supreme Court would have an interest in this case on Eighth Amendment grounds.”
Trump attorney Alina Habba told the X22 report Monday she was “confident” Trump’s debt would be dismissed.
“Despite the fact that witnesses frankly had said that they were great clients, we all made money, they did nothing wrong, we got slammed with this egregious number, and I’m confident we’ll overturn it,” Habba told the online podcast.
Writing on his Truth Social platform later Monday, Trump called the bond set by Engoron “unconsitutitonal, un-American, unprecedented, and practically impossible for ANY company, including one as successful as mine.”
“The Bonding Companies have never heard of such a bond of this size before nor do they have the ability to post such a bond, even if they wanted to,” Trump wrote.
Fox News’ Greg Norman contributed to this report.
Politics
ActBlue CEO faces June 10 grilling after fundraising powerhouse allegedly misled Congress on foreign donations
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
FIRST ON FOX: The embattled head of a Democratic fundraising behemoth is headed for a congressional grilling next month over allegations of fraudulent donations on its platform.
ActBlue’s CEO Regina Wallace-Jones will testify in a public hearing before the House Administration Committee on June 10, a committee spokesman told Fox News Digital.
Wallace-Jones’ agreement to testify comes as ActBlue faces mounting scrutiny over whether it misled Congress regarding foreign donations on its payment processing platform.
“Ms. Wallace-Jones allegedly misled our committee at the outset of our investigation into ActBlue’s fraud prevention standards,” House Administration Committee Chairman Bryan Steil, R-Wis., said in a statement. “It’s past time we set the record straight and got answers for the American people. I look forward to hearing her testify.”
House Administration Committee Chairman Bryan Steil, R-Wis., holds a press conference in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 10, 2025. (Anna Rose Layden/Getty Images)
DEM FUNDRAISING GIANT ACTBLUE ROCKED BY ALLEGATIONS IT MISLED CONGRESS ABOUT FOREIGN DONATIONS
The statement referenced an explosive report in The New York Times earlier this year that said ActBlue’s then-outside counsel warned Wallace-Jones in 2023 the group may have misrepresented facts to Steil’s committee about its vetting of potentially illegal foreign donations.
Under U.S. law, foreign nationals who are not lawful permanent residents are generally prohibited from donating to candidates seeking federal office or political action committees.
Steil previously requested that Wallace-Jones testify before his committee on May 19. The invitation was met with outrage from ActBlue’s lawyers, who dismissed the committee action as a “partisan attack.”
But Republicans have pointed to documents that ActBlue has allegedly withheld in response to subpoenas issued in 2025, which Steil has characterized as “deliberately incomplete.”
All five current or former ActBlue employees who appeared in depositions with the committee invoked their Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination a combined 146 times, according to an interim staff report released in April by House Republicans.
ActBlue CEO Regina Wallace-Jones, a delegate from California, wears a U.S.-flag themed outfit ahead of the Democratic National Convention at the United Center in Chicago, Ill., on Aug. 19, 2024.
TEXAS AG PAXTON SUES DEM FUNDRAISING PLATFORM ACTBLUE, ALLEGING ‘FRAUDULENT AND FOREIGN DONATIONS’
The House Administration Committee has been probing ActBlue’s fraud prevention safeguards since 2023, when Steil’s panel investigated the group’s failure to require credit card verification value (CVV) when processing payments.
“Given ActBlue’s demonstrated history of misleading Congress, there is considerable reason to believe that ActBlue may have deliberately withheld this responsive material to impede our investigation,” Steil and House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., and House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, wrote in a letter to Wallace-Jones in April.
In the letter, the senior Republicans also directed ActBlue to produce a trove of documents related to its vetting of political contributions from abroad.
Wallace-Jones has denied making false statements to Congress. The group’s lawyers have previously characterized the investigation as politically motivated and contended that ActBlue has been forthright with the committee.
Amid the GOP scrutiny, ActBlue has experienced a wave of resignations from senior legal and compliance staff.
An election countdown calendar hangs at the ActBlue fundraising office in Somerville, Mass. (Jessica Rinaldi/The Boston Globe via Getty Images)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The June hearing notice immediately follows the House Administration Committee advancing legislation to crack down on fraudulent political donations, including illegal contributions from foreigners. The campaign finance measure cleared Steil’s panel unanimously on Thursday.
“It’s a positive sign that people are beginning to take this risk and this threat seriously,” the Wisconsin Republican told Spectrum News.
Politics
The Steyer campaign pays influencers. Their posts don’t always make that clear
WASHINGTON — In recent weeks, several social media influencers have popped up in online feeds touting the California gubernatorial campaign of billionaire Democrat Tom Steyer.
Some complain about the price of gasoline. Others mention environmental concerns. One cites her newfound sobriety as evidence that people can change — a nod to Steyer’s self-proclaimed metamorphosis from hedge fund titan to scourge of big corporations.
“I did not expect the most progressive governor candidate to be a billionaire, but look at the policies you guys,” said one content creator on TikTok with the user name Jaz R. “Hear me out. I know Tom Steyer is a billionaire, but he also is for the people.”
The posts include direct-to-the-camera appeals, with personal details interwoven into messages of support for Steyer. An influencer goes for a stroll as onscreen text touts Steyer’s policies. Some seek to convey authenticity, if occasionally ham-fistedly; one influencer mispronounces Steyer’s last name.
What they do not include is a disclosure that their creators were paid by the Steyer campaign to produce the videos, according to a complaint filed this week with California’s Fair Political Practices Commission and a Times review of the posts.
The complaint alleges that the Steyer campaign failed to notify the influencers it hired of their obligation to inform their audience when their posts have been sponsored by the campaign.
California passed a law in 2023 requiring that influencers disclose if they have been paid to create promotional content for or against a candidate or ballot measure, one of the few jurisdictions in the country with such a requirement. There is no such requirement at the federal level.
“Every time there’s a new technology, you have to create legislation that requires them to disclose,” said state Sen. Tom Umberg (D-Orange), who sponsored the bill.
Violating the law doesn’t carry criminal, civil or administrative penalties, but the FPPC can take influencers who break the law to court and ask a judge to force them to comply.
The complaint was filed by two California women — political influencers themselves — who said they noticed a number of new accounts that suddenly started posting similar-sounding videos promoting Steyer earlier this month.
“They had the exact same language, they had the same talking points,” said Beatrice Gomberg, who worked with Kaitlyn Hennessy in their digital sleuthing efforts.
The FPPC did not comment on the complaint.
Steyer’s campaign appears to have relied on paid influencers more than any candidate for governor, according to the most recent campaign finance filings.
That spending represents only a small fraction of the massive campaign war chest Steyer has seeded with nearly $180 million of his own money. But the complaint highlights the growing degree to which political candidates have come to seek out the authenticity that social media influencers seem to offer.
Steyer campaign spokesperson Kevin Liao said the campaign had properly followed the rules in hiring influencers and that the campaign is “confident” that Gomberg and Hennessy’s complaint is “baseless.”
“Creators make their living generating content. The campaign believes in compensating people for their time and work product and has paid creators to generate content,” Liao said in a statement. “Payments for creator content are disclosed in campaign finance reports, and we notify creators we directly work with of their disclosure requirements.”
While many of the new Steyer influencers have few followers, Steyer’s campaign disclosed in its most recent campaign finance report that it had paid thousands of dollars to numerous social media influencers with massive audiences, the Sacramento Bee reported.
Several of the videos produced by these popular social media personalities also failed to disclose that they had been paid by the campaign, according to the complaint and The Times’ review of the content.
But even accounts with few followers can still have a big impact if they are producing a steady stream of content supporting Steyer, said veteran California political strategist Mike Madrid.
“What they’re trying to do is trip the algorithm,” he said. “It looks like it has a bigger audience than it really does. It’s taking the concept of astroturfing into the digital age.”
Gomberg and Hennessy said they became friends after meeting at an April campaign event for Xavier Becerra, Steyer’s chief Democratic rival in the race, who holds a narrow advantage over Steyer in several recent political polls.
The pair have been prolific social media supporters of Becerra’s campaign ever since, though they insist they are not being paid for their efforts.
They said they discovered that many of the new pro-Steyer accounts seemed to be run by influencers — mostly women — who had previously created different social media accounts to hawk other products.
One of the pro-Steyer influencers had an online portfolio listing numerous clients, including the Steyer campaign and a gummy designed to boost arousal, according to the complaint and the Times review of the publicly accessible website.
The pair said they stumbled on an advertisement placed by a vendor for the campaign on a platform used by creators to find work. The advertisement indicated that creators would be paid $10 for each post, with bonuses for posts that amassed large viewership.
The vendor who posted the ad did not respond to a request for comment.
The advertisement has since been updated to say that it pays $1,000 per month and that creators will have to disclose that it is paid content.
As Gomberg and Hennessy dug deeper, they determined that some of the influencers promoting a candidate for governor weren’t even based in California.
A TikTok account using the handle jess.votes, for example, appears to be connected to a woman registered to vote in Florida. Other accounts were connected to women who indicated elsewhere that they were based in Pennsylvania, Missouri and Michigan.
Several influencers who created seemingly paid content promoting Steyer did not respond to multiple requests for comment from The Times.
The brouhaha over paid social media content is just the latest instance of the growing political impact of online creators.
Eric Swalwell’s campaign for governor — and congressional career — came to an end after multiple women accused him of sexual assault. A pair of influencers had publicly raised concerns about Swalwell’s behavior and helped connect victims with journalists who produced highly detailed reports of the allegations.
The California law requires influencers to disclose in a political post’s audio or text that it was sponsored and who paid for it.
The onus is on the creators to make the disclosure, but campaigns are required to tell them that they must do so. Despite passage of the law, the issue has so far remained largely under the radar.
“I have dozens of candidates and campaigns and I have not heard this issue come up one time,” said a campaign finance lawyer who requested anonymity because they represent numerous candidates with active campaigns.
Gomberg and Hennessy said that they were driven to call attention to potential violations of the disclosure requirements because of their concern about the corrosive influence such paid content could have if left unchecked.
“You have people who have trust in these creators,” Hennessy said. “You have a responsibility to your audience.”
Politics
Video: Why Were These C.E.O.s in Beijing With Trump?
new video loaded: Why Were These C.E.O.s in Beijing With Trump?
By Ana Swanson, Nour Idriss, Nikolay Nikolov and James Surdam
May 15, 2026
-
Miami, FL5 minutes agoMiami Dolphins Discussion: Media Perception Edition
-
Boston, MA11 minutes agoMass General Brigham Sports Medicine provides free preseason physicals for Boston Public Schools – Boston News, Weather, Sports | WHDH 7News
-
Denver, CO17 minutes agoForget Denver, Retire To An Underrated Utah City Near Gorgeous Canyons Instead (And It’s Affordable) – Islands
-
Seattle, WA23 minutes agoSounders vs. Galaxy, livestream: Kickoff, lineups, updates
-
San Diego, CA29 minutes agoSan Diego – Cincinnati live | Marca
-
Milwaukee, WI35 minutes agoMother, son graduating from UWM together – but Panther pride doesn’t stop there
-
Atlanta, GA41 minutes agoHoax threat prompts Zoo Atlanta evacuation
-
Minneapolis, MN47 minutes agoMinnesota’s Unsung State Park Unit Is An Idyllic Minneapolis Day Trip To Boat, Fish, And Hike – Islands