Trump’s Lawyers Want Campaign Statements Excluded From Fraud Trial

Photo: Joseph Sohm / Shutterstock.com

Trump University was at best a mess that benefited few, if any, of its students. That’s where all the evidence seems to be leading, at any rate. Much of that evidence has either come to light, or come back to light, during Trump’s presidential campaign.

Thus, it’s troubling that his lawyers are asking that the judge presiding over the case bar everything said by or about Trump during his political campaign from being used in the courtroom in a trial scheduled to begin on Nov. 28.

The request, if granted, means that among other things, his tweets, his tax history, and his remarks about the judge presiding over the case lacking qualifications or impartiality due to his Mexican descent.

“Before trial begins in this case, prospective members of the jury will have the opportunity to cast their vote for president,” Trump’s lawyers wrote in the filing. “It’s in the ballot box where they are free to judge Mr. Trump based on all this and more.”

This request is unlikely to be fulfilled. It’s also unprecedented, as the lawyers are asking that the candidate’s entire political career, essentially, be ignored during this trial. They claim that it is irrelevant and could prejudice the jury.

 However, if the court expects to find 12 people in all of America who have no prior thoughts on Trump, they’re fooling themselves.

The trial in question is the culmination of a seven-year-long class action lawsuit, so it might seem like barring about a year and a half worth of comments by and about Trump is inconsequential. However, in the past couple of years, a lot has come out about Trump University, which closed in 2010.

Erwin Chemerinsky, the dean of the School of Law at the University of California, Irvine, says the judge probably won’t consider the entire breadth of the material requested to be barred, but will consider each statement that the plaintiff wants to use at trial.

“This is unique because I cannot think of another situation in which a political candidate would have wanted to exclude all of his campaign statements from being used at a trial,” says Chemerinsky.