New York Attorney General Letitia James may have thought targeting President Donald Trump would be a career-making move. Instead, her actions are now coming under fire from both legal experts and federal officials, raising serious questions about her integrity—and possibly her own legal exposure.

In a sharply critical op-ed for the left-leaning New York Magazine, CNN legal analyst and former federal prosecutor Elie Honig didn’t hold back, blaming James directly for igniting a politically motivated crusade against the Trump administration.

“James started it when she ran for New York AG and won in 2018 primarily on an explicit platform of Vote for me, fellow resistance warriors, and I’ll nail Trump,” Honig wrote.

He pointed out that James campaigned explicitly on using her office to go after President Trump—even before having access to any evidence. Her public statements, including a vow to be “a real pain in the ass” to Trump, showcased a disturbing politicization of law enforcement powers.

“Before she had access to any evidence, James declared conclusively that Trump ‘engaged in a pattern and practice of money laundering’ and ‘can be indicted for criminal offenses,’” Honig added.
“The day after she won office... the new AG exulted, ‘We’re going to definitely sue him... He’s going to know my name personally.’ For what? Who knows. Just something.”

James eventually brought her long-promised civil fraud case against the Trump Organization, accusing it of overvaluing assets to secure business loans. A New York judge, Arthur Engoron, sided with James, imposing over $500 million in penalties after a trial that many legal observers criticized as overtly political and lacking a clear victim.

“James did sue Trump, of course, and won (for the moment)... During the trial, James made a series of wildly inappropriate out-of-court statements... publicly branding Trump and his family members as liars, while they were testifying,” Honig noted.

Honig also questioned the strength of the case, emphasizing that the so-called "victims"—major banks and financial institutions—were fully repaid with interest and never filed complaints against the Trump Organization.

“The purported fraud victims were multibillion-dollar banks that were repaid in full... and made millions in profits,” he wrote.
“A New York appellate-division panel voiced pointed skepticism... and seems poised either to substantially reduce the verdict or throw it out.”

Now, with President Trump back in the White House following his 2024 victory, it is Letitia James who finds herself facing potential legal scrutiny.

A letter from Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) Director William Pulte, sent last month to Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi and Deputy AG Todd Blanche, alleges that James may have falsified records in order to secure favorable home loan terms in Virginia—at the same time she was leading the civil fraud case against Trump.

“Ms. James was the sitting Attorney General of New York and is required by law to have her primary residence in the state of New York — even though her mortgage applications list her intent to have the Norfolk, VA, property as her primary home,” the letter states.

The accusation is especially damning given its timing: the Virginia mortgage transaction allegedly occurred just weeks before James launched her case against Trump in August 2023.

Pulte further noted that James has a history of misrepresenting real estate information, including a Brooklyn property she purchased in 2001 that was recorded as a five-unit dwelling, though she repeatedly listed it as four units on building permits and mortgage documents.

Additionally, documents show that James once co-signed a mortgage with her father but was listed as “husband and wife” with him on legal filings from 1983 and 2000—raising further red flags.

“While this was a long time ago, it raises serious concerns about the validity of Ms. James’ representations on mortgage applications,” Pulte wrote.

These revelations come at a critical moment, as many Americans grow weary of politically motivated lawfare. The use of prosecutorial power to settle political scores not only undermines public trust—it threatens the very foundations of justice.

James' own legal troubles now serve as a sobering warning: when public officials weaponize the law for partisan purposes, they often end up answering for their own abuses.