Supreme Court Rejects Trump’s Final Appeal, Clearing Way for Asset Seizures

Описание: Supreme Court Rejects Trump’s Final Appeal, Clearing Way for Asset Seizures
In a decisive and historic ruling, the Supreme Court of the United States has denied Donald Trump’s emergency request to halt civil asset seizures authorized by New York courts, effectively ending his last remaining legal effort to stop enforcement of a massive fraud judgment against the Trump Organization.

The Court’s 7–2 decision, issued Friday evening, confirms that a sitting president does not possess immunity from lawful civil enforcement actions by state governments. Despite arguments that asset seizure would interfere with presidential duties or raise national security concerns, the Court found no constitutional basis to suspend enforcement. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented, while the remaining justices—including members of the conservative majority—rejected the request.

Chief Justice John Roberts issued a concurring opinion emphasizing that the judiciary’s role is not to shield powerful individuals from accountability, but to apply the law equally. The opinion underscores a core constitutional principle: no person, including the president, is above the law.

With the ruling, New York authorities are now free to proceed immediately. Court-appointed receivers are expected to take control of key Trump properties, bank accounts will be frozen and transferred, and assets will be liquidated to satisfy the judgment. The enforcement process is expected to unfold rapidly, potentially dismantling a business empire built over decades.

The decision carries implications far beyond one individual. It establishes a clear precedent that presidents who choose to retain private business interests while in office remain subject to the same civil legal consequences as any other citizen. Legal scholars describe the ruling as a landmark affirmation of accountability, separation of powers, and the durability of the rule of law.

As enforcement begins and political fallout accelerates, the ruling marks a pivotal moment for the presidency, the judiciary, and the constitutional system itself.