Judge in Trump Case Received ‘Hundreds’ of Threats, Court Filing Shows

The judge in the civil fraud case against former President Donald Trump has received hundreds of threatening messages, court filings show.

Justice Arthur Engoron presides over the civil fraud trial of former President Donald Trump at New York State Supreme Court, in New York City, on Oct. 18, 2023. Jeenah Moon/Pool/Getty Images

A new court filing shows that the office of the judge presiding over the civil fraud trial of former President Donald Trump in New York has received “hundreds of threatening, harassing, disparaging and antisemitic” threats.

The threats were made to the office of Judge Arthur Engoron, according to an affidavit that was attached to a Nov. 22 court filing, which states that there’s been a “deluge” of threatening messages to the court’s chambers phone and the personal cell phone as well as email and social media accounts of Judge Engoron’s chief law clerk, Allison Greenfield.

The filing, registered with the New York appeals court, argues that a gag order against President Trump that was handed down weeks ago by Judge Engoron should be upheld.

This came after President Trump publicly criticized Ms. Greenfield.

“Ms. Greenfield’s personal information, including her personal cell phone number and personal email addresses also have been compromised resulting in daily doxing,” Charles Hollon, the court officer with the New York Department of Public Safety, wrote in the affidavit.

“She has been subjected to, on a daily basis, harassing, disparaging comments, and antisemitic tropes.”

President Trump has not publicly commented on the matter.

Former President Donald Trump speaks to a crowd of supporters at the Fort Dodge Senior High School in Fort Dodge, Iowa, on Nov. 18, 2023. Jim Vondruska/Getty Images

More Details

Mr. Hollon also wrote in the affidavit that, prior to the commencement of the trial, the judicial threats unit became aware of “harassing and disparaging comments and threats made about and toward Judge Engoron on social media.”

After determining that the threats were deemed to be “credible,” the unit contacted the FBI and Homeland Security to implement extra security measures to protect the judge, his family, and his chamber staff.

Further, Mr. Hollon claimed in the affidavit that, after President Trump posted a picture on social media of Ms. Greenfield with Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) on Oct. 3, the threats, harassment, and disparaging comments “increased exponentially” and began to target Ms. Greenfield.

President Trump labeled Ms. Greenfield as a Democratic Party loyalist with close ties to Mr. Schumer.

“Schumer’s girlfriend, Allison R. Greenfield, is running this case against me. How Disgraceful! This case should be dismissed immediately,” President Trump wrote in the post.

Mr. Hollon said that, even though President Trump didn’t directly threaten Ms. Greenfield, “the comments made in his post resulted in hundreds of threatening and harassing voicemail messages” that he said have been “transcribed into over 275 single spaced pages.”

While the affidavit doesn’t include the threatening messages allegedly made against Ms. Greenfield, it does include transcripts of menacing voicemails left on Judge Engoron’s chambers telephone.

“You should be assassinated. You should be killed,” reads one message.

“Arthur, you are a corrupt Nazi and one of the ugliest people to ever walk the face of the earth. And your clerk, who’s also [a] corrupt Nazi is a fat [expletive] who [expletive] Chuck Schumer and everybody knows it,” reads another. “You are such a lowlife.”

Mr. Hollon wrote that threats against Judge Engoron and Ms. Greenfield can be deemed “serious and credible and not hypothetical or speculative,” and that the messages received by the judge and his staff “created an ongoing security risk for the judge, his staff and his family.”

He added that the flood of threatening messages had caused the judicial threats assessment unit to have to constantly reassess what security protections should be put in place to ensure the safety of the judge and people around him.

What Trump Has Said

President Trump has argued that the judge’s gag order is unconstitutional and that the sanctions against him go against the court’s rules.

His lawyers wrote in a recent filing that the order blocked his First Amendment right to free speech as he is campaigning for president. President Trump is the frontrunner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination.

“This constitutional protection is at its apogee where the speech in question is core political speech, made by the frontrunner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, regarding perceived partisanship and bias at a trial where he is subject to hundreds of millions of dollars in penalties and the threatened prohibition of his lawful business activities in the state,” the lawyers wrote earlier this month.

Last week, a state appeals court lifted the gag order. Ruling at an emergency hearing on Nov. 16, Associate Justice David Friedman questioned Judge Engoron’s authority to police President Trump’s speech outside the courtroom, including his frequent complaints about the case on social media and in comments to TV cameras in the courthouse hallway.

“Considering the constitutional and statutory rights at issue an interim stay is granted,” Judge Friedman wrote in an order.

The judge said that while it’s true that judges often issue gag orders, they’re mostly used in criminal cases where there’s a fear that comments about the case could influence the jury. The former president’s civil trial doesn’t have a jury.

Trump lawyer Christopher Kise said after the ruling that the appellate judge “made the right decision and allowed President Trump to take full advantage of his constitutional First Amendment rights to talk about bias in his own trial, what he’s seeing and witnessing in his own trial—which, frankly, everyone needs to see.”

Another Trump attorney, Alina Habba, last week indicated that she has no plans to advise the former president to keep quiet about the clerk.

“I don’t see a reason for restrictions because Ms. James is continuing to disparage my client,” said Ms. Habba, referring to the New York attorney general. “Both sides need to be able to speak.”

Jack Phillips and The Associated Press contributed to this report.