Trump Mocked After Claiming The Constitution Prohibits His $450 Million Fraud Fines

Former President Donald Trump was criticized after claiming the 8th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution's prohibition on "excessive fines" makes the fine levied in his New York fraud trial unconstitutional.

Last week, Judge Arthur Engoron imposed a financial penalty of $354.8 million on Trump, along with an additional sum of around $100 million in pre-judgment interest. The ruling came as a consequence of the judge's determination that Trump had artificially inflated his net worth with the intention of securing more favorable loan terms.

During a Fox News town hall with host Laura Ingraham this week, Trump proceeded to pull a copy of the 8th Amendment out of his pocket before reading the section that states “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."

Trump failed to note that the stipulation about "excessive fines" applies to criminal cases, not civil ones. After Ingraham observed that Trump owes "such a huge amount of money," he vowed he would appeal, saying that "We'll have a lot of cash" but that it "doesn't mean [Engoron] can take it."

You can hear Trump's remarks in the video below.

Trump also posted a screenshot of the text of the 8th Amendment in a post on Truth Social.

@realDonaldTrump/Truth Social

Given Trump has called for the "termination" of the Constitution, vowed to be a dictator from "day one," and is currently fighting efforts to keep him off the presidential ballot that cite the 14th Amendment—which bars from the ballot anyone who engages in an insurrection against the United States—people didn't take his current fealty to the Constitution too seriously.

The mockery was swift.

New York Attorney General Letitia James informed ABC News that she is ready to take possession of the former President's assets if he fails to procure the funds required to settle the fine:

"If he does not have funds to pay off the judgment, then we will seek judgment enforcement mechanisms in court, and we will ask the judge to seize his assets."

Expressing strong confidence in the appeal case, James emphasized that her office would not hesitate to seize specific assets, including Trump's 40 Wall Street skyscraper, should he be unable to meet the financial obligations outlined in the court-ordered disgorgement.

James directly refuted Trump's claim that the case lacked victims, asserting the significance of her case in safeguarding fair treatment in financial markets for New Yorkers. She said Trump's fraud "wasn't just a simple mistake, a slight oversight, the variations are wildly exaggerated, and the extent of the fraud was staggering."

James pointed out that if average New Yorkers "went into a bank and submitted false documents, the government would throw the book at them, and the same should be true for former presidents."