In a significant turn of events, an appeals court has halted Judge Engoron’s order to dissolve Donald Trump’s businesses in New York. This decision has sparked a flurry of reactions on social media, with many weighing in on the implications of this move.
The Appeals Court’s Decision
The breaking news came to light when a tweet from Chuck Callesto highlighted that the appeals court had put a stop to Judge Engoron’s directive to break up the Trump Business in New York. This decision has been seen as a significant power move by the court, emphasizing the importance of due process and the rights of businesses.
Tweet by Chuck Callesto
BREAKING NOW: Appeals court PUTS A STOP to Judge Engoron’s order to BREAK UP Donald Trump's businesses in New York..
"We thank the Appellate Division for staying the NY Attorney General’s and Judge Engoron’s overzealous attempt to CANCEL our New York business certificates.…
— Chuck Callesto (@ChuckCallesto) October 6, 2023
Official Statement on the Decision
Following the court’s decision, an official statement was released thanking the Appellate Division for staying the NY Attorney General’s and Judge Engoron’s attempt to cancel the New York business certificates of Trump’s enterprises. The statement highlighted the potential impact on nearly 1,000 employees in New York, emphasizing their rights and the importance of due process.
The statement read: “Judge Engoron’s order erroneously sought to adjudicate the rights of non-party business entities… in clear violation of their fundamental Constitutional rights and Due Process.” It further vowed to continue defending the company and its employees from what it termed as “politically-motivated persecution.”
Public Reaction to the Court’s Decision
The decision has elicited a wide range of reactions on social media platforms, especially Twitter. Here are some notable tweets in response to the news:
Harris Lyle L tweeted, expressing his views on the matter. View Tweet…
LOL! The appeals court did not put a stop to anything! They delayed Engoron’s summary judgment but the case is still going forward! Once this trial is over the break up of the Trump businesses in New York will be executed as ordered! https://t.co/VpIZiPjOvb
— The Lyle L Harris (@HarrisLyleL) October 6, 2023
Darryll Revok shared his perspective, adding another layer to the public discourse.
Finally. Some sanity entering the legal conversation.
— Darryll_Revok (@DarryllRevok) October 6, 2023
Don McLaughlin voiced his opinion, reflecting the diverse range of sentiments on the issue.
That's a good first step.
Now, they need to dismiss the case. I realize there needs to be a ruling and an appeal.
— D. Mclaughlin – panem et circenses (@DonMcLaughlin9) October 6, 2023
Tate White Rabbit and Keith DB also chimed in, adding to the rich tapestry of public opinion on the matter.
View Tate’s Profile
View Keith’s Tweet
This decision was mostly a loss for Trump. Trump had asked the appellate court to stop the trial, the court refused. The only win here is it ordered a stay in the dissolution of the business until after the trial is resolved. A stay is not a win on the merits.
— Keith (@KeithDB80) October 6, 2023
Implications for Trump Business
The decision by the appeals court has significant implications for the Trump Business. With the dissolution paused, the business can continue its operations without immediate disruption. However, the broader legal battles and challenges remain, and it will be crucial to monitor how the situation unfolds in the coming days.
The appeals court’s decision to pause the dissolution of Trump’s businesses in New York is a testament to the complexities of the legal system and the importance of due process. As the situation continues to evolve, the broader implications for the Trump Business and the economic landscape of New York remain to be seen. We encourage our readers to stay informed and actively engage in discussions surrounding this topic. Please share your thoughts and opinions in the comment box below. Your voice matters, and we value your perspective.
Disclaimer: This article is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or an official statement from any of the parties involved. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any agency or organization. Readers are advised to consult with appropriate professionals or sources before making any decisions based on the content of this article.