Trump U. fraud trial: Why Trump's lawyers want campaign statements excluded

In an unusual legal request, attorneys for Donald Trump have asked a federal judge presiding over the Trump University civil trial to exclude any statements made by or about Trump during his presidential campaign.

Evan Vucci/AP
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump arrives to speak at a campaign rally at Regent University, Saturday in Virginia Beach, Va.

Donald Trump’s lawyers are asking a federal judge presiding over the presidential nominee’s upcoming civil trial over Trump University to bar all statements made by or about Mr. Tump during his presidential campaign.

These exclusions would include tweets, a 2005 video of him boasting about sexually assaulting women, his tax history, criticisms of his charitable foundation, and his comments about the judge presiding over the case, who is of Mexican descent.

Filed on Thursday in US District Court for the Southern District of California in San Diego, the request pertains to a nearly 7-year-old class-action lawsuit scheduled to begin Nov. 28, in which students at Trump University claim they were defrauded by the unaccredited school’s real estate seminars. The university closed in 2010.

In the legal filing, Trump’s lead attorney, Daniel Petrocelli, claims the evidence may prejudice the jury and jeopardize the fairness of the trial. Allowing even Trump’s own remarks, he wrote, "carries an immediate and irreparable danger of extreme and irremediable prejudice to defendants, confusion of issues and waste of time."

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

Trump's lawyers had fought to have the lawsuit, filed in 2013, dismissed altogether. While Trump did help develop the concept and curriculum for the real estate school, they argued, his staff managed the university by the time the plaintiffs purchased seminars.

The plaintiffs in the case claim that Trump University seminars and classes were like infomercials, pressuring students to spend upwards of $35,000 on mentorships. Ultimately, they argue, the university failed to teach real estate success. Similar claims have been made in another class-action complaint in San Diego and in a lawsuit in New York, where the state’s Attorney General Eric Schneiderman sued Trump in 2013 for illegal business practices, describing his university as an “elaborate bait-and-switch.”

Trump's lawyers also requested that U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel, whom Trump has described in rallies as a “hater of Donald Trump” and as “a Mexican,” to withhold evidence about students' finances from the trial. Affordability of Trump University, they argue, is not relevant to the trial.

The Republican presidential nominee has steadfastly denied the allegations, citing positive reviews given by former customers.

In separate court filings, lawyers for the students asked to bar other evidence from the trial, including testimonials about the value of the seminars, arguing that they are irrelevant to whether the university misrepresented the qualifications of its instructors.

Judge Curiel will consider Trump's request at a hearing on November 10, two days after the election.

According to Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the School of Law at the University of California in Irvine, Judge Curiel is unlikely to rule on the breadth of material requested to be barred, and will instead 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," Prof. Chemerinsky said.

This report includes material from the Associated Press and Reuters. 

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Trump U. fraud trial: Why Trump's lawyers want campaign statements excluded
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2016/1024/Trump-U.-fraud-trial-Why-Trump-s-lawyers-want-campaign-statements-excluded
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe