Trump Blasts "Mexican" Judge Presiding Over Trump University Fraud Lawsuit

I have no problem with public comments on a lawsuit.  The First Amendment protects the right of people to talk about a lawsuit, even one that is pending.  (Whether it is wise though is a different issue.)   A judge who can't handle public criticism, or allows it to affect his or her decisions, needs to find a new line of work.

But Donald Trump's rambling and disjointed commentary, quoted below, is alarming for numerous

Donald Trump

reason. First, it suggest the speaker is incapable of approaching issues logically and advancing arguments, pretty important qualities for a President. 

Second, the pedestrian language used in the rambling commentary indicate Trump, despite his constant bragging about his "very good brain," is not an intelligent man.    Not that one has to be a rocket scientist to be President.  But a minimum level of intelligence should be expected.  Liberals like to joke that President George W. Bush was a dummy and pointed to his frequent butchering of the English language as proof.  But for all his grammar faux pas, Bush had no problem making coherent arguments for public policy positions.  (Not saying people agreed with those policies, which is a different issue.)  You can't say the same for Donald Trump.

Third, Trump's comments contain a suggestion that his election as President would have an influence on the fraud case.  While he falls short of lodging a threat against the judge here, in the past he has indicated he would use the Office of the Presidency to settle political and personal scores.  Several commentators have written that a Trump Presidency would be "Nixon-on-Steroids," i.e. that a President Trump would use the agencies of government to target his enemies.  (Here is one such example.)  It's hard to believe exactly that as he has repeatedly said his enemies better watch out for retribution while on the campaign trail.

Fourth, what is the purpose of Trump even bringing up  the judge's supposed "Mexican" heritage?  (The judge was born in Indiana and went to Indiana University Law School.) Trump makes clear he loves Mexicans, a point which he makes while at the same time bringing up the judge's supposed ethnicity.)  It is clear that the only reason to do that is to bait the audience into a visceral response against the judge.

South Texas College of Law Professor Josh Blackman provides the transcription of Trump's comments on his blog.  (The full rally is on YouTube and is below.):

Does everybody have a little time? [cheers and applause] so I end up with a lawsuit, and it ends up in San Diego in federal court. It is a disgrace the way the federal court is acting, because it is a simple lawsuit. Everybody that took the so-called course. Trump University is in San Diego. The trial, they wanted it to start while I am running for president. The trial is going to take place sometime in November. There should be no trial. This should have been dismissed on summary judgment easily. Everybody says it, but I have a judge who is a hater of Donald Trump. He’s a hater. His name is Gonzalo Curial. And he is not doing the right thing. I figure what the hell? Why not talk about it for two minutes. Should I talk about it? Yes? [cheers and applause] so we should have won. . . .

But I am getting railroaded by a legal system, and frankly they should be ashamed. I will be here in November. Hey, if I win as president, it is a civil case. I could have settled this case numerous times. But I don’t want to settle cases when we are right. I don’t believe in it. When you start settling cases, do you know what happens? Everybody sues you because you get known as a settler. One thing about me, I am not known as the settler.

And people understand with this whole thing, with this whole deal with the lawyers, class action lawyers are the worst. It is a scam. Here is what happens. We are in front of a very hostile judge. The judge was appointed by by Barrack Obama – federal judge. [Boos]. Frankly he should recuse himself. He has given us ruling after ruling, negative, negative, negative. I have a top lawyer who said he has never seen anything like this before. So what happens is we get sued. We have a Magistrate named William Gallo who truly hates us.

The good news is it is a jury trial. We can even get a fully jury. We are entitled to a jury, and we want a jury of 12 people. And you are going to watch. First of all, it should be dismissed. Watch how we win it was I have been treated unfairly. Very much like with the veterans, where I raised all that money, but on Tuesday I am announcing all of the groups we are giving almost $6 million to. You turn things around. Here is the story. We have a law firm named Robin Skeller. It is the spin-off of two law firms. Two of those partners went to jail for an extended period of time for doing very bad things legally. This same group is the lawyers against. So what happens is the judge, who happens to be, we believe Mexican, which is great. I think that is fine. You know what? I think the Mexicans are going to end up loving Donald Trump when I give all these jobs. I think they are going to love it. I think they are going to love me. . . .

A lot of people said before you run you should settle. I said I don’t care. The people understand it. And they use it. So when I have 10,000 people, and when we have mostly unbelievable reviews, how do you settle? And in fact, when the case started originally, I said how can I settle when I have a review like this? Now I should have settled, but I am glad I didn’t. I will be seeing you in November either as president. And I will say this. I have all these great reviews, but I will say this. I think Judge Curiel should be ashamed of himself. I think it is a disgrace he is doing this. I look forward to going before a jury, not this judge, and we will win that trial. We will win that trial. Check it out. Check it out, folks. You know, I tell this to people.  November 28. I think it is scheduled for. It should not be a trial. It should be a summary judgment dismissal. . . .

It is a disgrace. It is a rigged system. I had a rigged system, except we won by so much. This court system, the judges in this court system, federal court. They ought to look into Judge Curiel because what Judge Curiel is doing is a total disgrace. Ok? But we will come back in November. Wouldn’t that be wild if I am president and come back and do a civil case? Where everybody likes it. Ok. This is called life, folks. . 

See also: "On Donald Trump and the Rule of Law" by Temple University Law Professor David Post.