Erin Scott | Reuters A federal judge sanctioned former President Donald Trump’s lawyers on Thursday as punishment for pushing a “frivolous” lawsuit against a number of Trump’s political foes, including Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee. Judge Donald Middlebrooks’ scathing order in federal court in Florida argued that Trump’s lawyers had undermined the rule of law by advancing a political narrative in court “without factual basis or any known legal theory.” “Additional sanctions may be appropriate,” the judge noted, after suggesting the lawyers’ conduct may require the “attention of the Bar and disciplinary authorities.” The sanctions — which require Trump’s lawyers to pay $50,000 and reimburse a defense attorney’s legal fees — came two months after Middlebrooks had thrown out the lawsuit, describing it as a “two-hundred-page political manifesto.” The former president’s civil suit, filed in March, outlined a sprawling conspiracy by dozens of defendants to spread a false narrative of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia during the 2016 presidential election. Trump has sought tens of millions of dollars in damages, alleging violations of the RICO Act, a federal law aimed at fighting organized crime, among other claims. “This was a shotgun lawsuit,” Middlebrooks wrote in Thursday’s order in U.S. District Court in southern Florida. “Thirty-one individuals and organizations were subpoenaed, forced to hire lawyers to defend frivolous claims. The only common thread against them was hostility to Mr. Trump.” The judge found that four of Trump’s lawyers — Alina Habba, Michael Madaio, Peter Ticktin and Jamie Alan Sasson — should be punished under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which aims to prevent parties from filing frivolous lawsuits. They are ordered to pay “jointly and severally” $50,000 in penalties, as well as legal fees totaling $16,274 collected by defendant Charles Dolan, who filed the sanctions request. Trump’s lawyers did not immediately respond to CNBC’s requests for comment. “The failures of the original complaint were basic and obvious,” Middlebrooks’ order said. He noted that “when these weaknesses were identified” in the motions to dismiss the case, Trump’s lawyers simply “added arguments in an attempt to circumvent the RICO statute of limitations” and attacked two more defendants. “The choice of defendants, coupled with the lack of any viable legal theories of liability, reflects an intent to injure rather than redress legal harm,” Middlebrooks wrote. Even after the judge pointed out the “deficiencies” of the legal complaint, he wrote, Habba went on Fox News’ “Hannity” and “continued to advance Plaintiff’s claims.” The judge included a quote from Habba from that Sept. 10 interview, when she criticized Middlebrooks as a “Clinton judge” who “basically ignored any factual basis” for the lawsuit. “The rule of law is being undermined by the toxic combination of political fundraising with legal fees paid by political action committees, reckless and untrue statements by lawyers at rallies and in the media, and by efforts to advance a political narrative through lawsuits with no basis in fact or any recognizable legal theory,” Middlebrooks wrote. “Lawyers allow this behavior and I am pessimistic that Rule 11 alone can effectively curb this abuse. Aspects may be beyond the remit of the judiciary, requiring the attention of the Bar and disciplinary authorities . Additional sanctions may be appropriate,” the judge wrote. “But legal filings such as those at issue here should be sanctioned under Article 11, both to punish this conduct and to deter similar conduct by these lawyers and others.”
