New York Judge Arthur Engoron issued this Thursday an updated order setting out the parameters of a court-appointed monitor’s work amid the civil fraud case brought by state Attorney General Letitia James against Donald Trump and figures close to him. The monitor, retired federal Judge Barbara Jones, is broadly empowered to perform close oversight of the Trump Organization’s business activities.
And that includes efforts at securing bonds, per the new order. “The Trump Organization shall inform the Monitor, in advance, of any effort to secure surety bonds, including any financial disclosures requested or required, any information provided in response to such requests, any representations made by Trump Organization in connection with securing such bonds, any personal guarantees made by any of the Defendants, and any obligations of the Trump Organization required by the surety,” the judge wrote.
The order outlines a three-year stint of work by the Trump Organization’s business monitor, which would mean — assuming that expectation holds — that Jones would be overseeing broad swathes of the Trump Organization’s financial dealings through early 2027, though Engoron left open the possibility of changing how long the monitor is on the case, including by making it longer. Engoron said that in the event of violations the “Court may modify this Monitorship Order, including as to the scope and length of the monitorship, and order such relief as the Court deems just and proper.”
Jones’ general responsibilities are, per the new order, oversight of defendants’ “internal accounting controls, governance, record-keeping, and financial reporting policies and procedures.”
The context for this is a case from James specifically — and successfully — alleging a years-long pattern of business fraud hinging on the misrepresentation of various assets’ value. Engoron imposed penalties on Trump himself that, when including interest, approach half a billion dollars, and within mere days, James can start pursuing collections if Trump fails to either fulfill requirements for a bond that would hold off collections during appeals, outright satisfy the penalties, or successfully secure a court’s intervention.
