In the most recent legal blow to Donald J. Trump, a federal judge on Friday dismissed a lawsuit the previous president filed that sought to halt the Recent York attorney general’s civil investigation into his business practices.
The ruling, in federal court in Albany, was Mr. Trump’s second defeat related to the investigation in two days. On Thursday, an appellate court ordered Mr. Trump and two of his children to sit down for questioning under oath from the office of the state attorney general, Letitia James.
Together, the rulings clear the way in which for Ms. James to finish her investigation in the approaching weeks or months. While Ms. James, a Democrat searching for re-election, doesn’t have the authority to bring criminal charges against Mr. Trump or his family’s real estate business, she will be able to file a lawsuit if she concludes that they committed fraud.
Last month, one in all her lawyers indicated that a suit may very well be coming soon, saying that the office was preparing an “enforcement motion” within the near future.
It’s unclear if Mr. Trump plans to appeal either of the rulings. His lawyers didn’t reply to requests for comment.
“The courts have made clear that Donald J. Trump’s baseless legal challenges cannot stop our lawful investigation into his and the Trump Organization’s financial dealings,” Ms. James said in an announcement. “Nobody on this country can pick and select how the law applies to them, and Donald Trump isn’t any exception. As we now have said all along, we are going to proceed this investigation undeterred.”
Lawyers for Mr. Trump filed the federal lawsuit in December, arguing that Ms. James’s public criticism of Mr. Trump, and the subpoenas she had issued him and his company, violated several of his constitutional rights, including those to free speech and due process.
Within the ruling on Friday, Brenda K. Sannes, the federal judge, rejected Mr. Trump’s claim that Ms. James’s investigation was politically motivated and that she had violated his rights.
Mr. Trump’s suit had cited a litany of Ms. James’s public statements criticizing him, including a 2017 tweet declaring that she was “leading the resistance against Donald Trump in NYC.”
While Ms. James’s public statements could reflect political or personal animus toward Mr. Trump, the judge said, they weren’t enough to prove that the attorney general had infringed upon Mr. Trump’s rights.
Judge Sannes also found “no evidence that the subpoena enforcement proceeding has been conducted in such a way as to constitute harassment.”
Mr. Trump has denied all wrongdoing and has blasted Ms. James, calling her investigation “a witch hunt.”
Understand the Recent York A.G.’s Trump Inquiry
Card 1 of 6
An empire under scrutiny. Letitia James, the Recent York State attorney general, is currently conducting a civil investigation into former President Donald J. Trump’s business practices. Here’s what to know:
The origins of the inquiry. The investigation began after Michael D. Cohen, Mr. Trump’s former personal lawyer and fixer, testified to Congress that Mr. Trump and his employees had manipulated his net price to suit his interests.
Contempt ruling. A judge held Mr. Trump in contempt of court for failing to show over documents to Ms. James, ordering him to offer the records and be fined $10,000 per day until he did so. Two weeks later, the judge withdrew the judicial order on the condition Mr. Trump paid the $110,000 effective he had amassed over that period.
Her investigation is concentrated on his annual financial statements, which contain estimated values of his golf courses, hotels and other properties. Ms. James is scrutinizing whether Mr. Trump and his company falsely — and fraudulently — inflated those values to secure loans and other financial advantages.
In a court filing this 12 months, Ms. James revealed that Mr. Trump’s longtime accounting firm had cut ties with him and essentially retracted nearly a decade’s price of the financial statements.
She also argued, in a separate filing, that the Trump Organization had engaged in “fraudulent or misleading” practices. But her lawyers said that they needed to gather additional records and testimony, from Mr. Trump particularly, before they might resolve whether to file a lawsuit.
Last month, a state judge in Manhattan, Arthur F. Engoron, held Mr. Trump in contempt of court for failing to totally comply with Ms. James’s subpoena searching for his personal records. (The judge recently released the contempt order, after Mr. Trump paid a $110,000 effective and filed additional documents detailing his effort to comply.)
Justice Engoron also ordered Mr. Trump — in addition to two of his children, Donald Trump Jr. and Ivanka Trump — to be interviewed under oath by Ms. James’s office. In its ruling on Thursday, a Recent York State appeals court upheld that order.
As Ms. James is escalating her civil inquiry, Mr. Trump also faces a criminal investigation by the Manhattan district attorney’s office into among the same business practices Ms. James is reviewing.
But while the criminal investigation is constant, prosecutors stopped presenting evidence about Mr. Trump to a grand jury early this 12 months.