A judge ruled on Thursday that four people were prosecuting President TrumpThe choice of Donald John TrumpTrump's senior management has been criticized in a note from the Justice Department regarding the obstruction of justice by Mueller: the Senate approves the funding bill, preventing the partial closure of the government. Senators call on the Trump administration to reconsider the withdrawal of Syria MORE and the Trump organization regarding fake commercial projects can remain anonymous for fear of retaliation.
The plaintiffs argued that Trump had "a history of possession of his wealth, stature, and Twitter account to attack people whom he perceives to be his enemies" and asked a judge to allow them to Use pseudonyms, the New York Times reported.
Lorna G. Schofield of the Manhattan Federal District Court granted their request. The lawsuit names them only Jane Doe, Luke Loe, Richard Roe and Mary Moe.
"The way in which the President has used his position and platform to influence the progress of pending cases is truly unprecedented," said Schofield.
"Whether at the initiative of him or his supporters, the damage involved here is not hypothetical," she continued. "They are real, significant and constitute an unjustified obstacle to those who would like to assert their rights in a federal court."
Complainants may remain anonymous until they decide on the defense's motion to dismiss the case, at which time complainants may renew their request for confidentiality.
The defendants' lawyers denied the risk of revenge for the plaintiffs, the newspaper reported.
"Mr. Trump is, after all, the president of the United States in power and when such slanderous accusations are made against him in a public prosecution, the public has every interest in knowing who is making the allegations. , so as to be able to assess the accuracy of the facts, what is alleged and learn about the credibility of the accuser, "wrote the attorneys.
The Hill contacted the Trump organization for comments.
In late October, four people filed a lawsuit to accuse Trump and his three eldest – Donald Trump Jr.Donald (Don) John TrumpTrump Jr on Ocasio-Cortez Media Coverage: "Welcome to Our World," Trump Cleaves NY Dems on the Closing of the Trump Foundation Director The Clinton Foundation Mocks the Closure of the Foundation Trump despite legal issues MORE, Ivanka TrumpIvana (Ivanka) Marie TrumpTrump tears up NY Dems after the Trump Foundation closes The Clinton Foundation mocks the Trump Foundation closure as legal trouble pushes it, Trump will attend the World Economic Forum in Davos for the second time consecutive year NEXT and Eric TrumpEric Frederick TrumpTrump kidnaps the NY Dems at the closing of the Trump Foundation The Clinton Foundation's leadership mocks the Trump Foundation's closure amidst legal troubles Trump's charity agrees to dissolve amid allegations that which a shocking "scheme of illegality" NEXT – to have deliberately encouraged them to invest in companies in exchange for "significant and secret payments" between 2005 and 2015.
The three named companies were ACN Opportunity, a multi-level marketing company specializing in telecommunications. The Trump Network, which sold a range of dietary supplements and multivitamins; and the Trump Institute, a live seminar program that claimed to sell Trump's "secrets of success," according to the lawsuit.
Trump would have used his well-known name to promote rapid enrichment tactics among vulnerable investors, promising legitimate business opportunities "to enrich themselves by systematically defrauding economically marginalized people."
The four plaintiffs identify themselves in court documents obtained by The Times as being a hospice, a self-employed formerly homeless, a food delivery driver and a mother of three who works at a sales outlet in the United States. national detail.
"We are pleased that the court, recognizing the reasonableness of our clients' fears of retaliation by the defendants and their supporters, has allowed the plaintiffs to sue under a pseudonym," said Roberta Kaplan, the plaintiff's attorney.
A Trump Organization lawyer told the Times that the lawsuit "was only another effort by the opposition to the president to use the judicial system to advance a political agenda."