Former first daughter Ivanka Trump and her husband Jared Kushner appeared without a care in the world on Saturday as they walked their dog around Miami, just days after a New York appeals court ruled Ivanka must testify in her father’s fraud investigation.
Ivanka was seen in pink tie-dyed shorts and a white t-shirt, with a white hat, pink sneakers and turquoise socks as she walked her dog, Winter, with Jared walking and sweating beside her.
He donned a bluish gray t-shirt for the walk, with black shorts, black socks and gray sneakers, also with a white cap and sunglasses – and was apparently working out as he had a sweat stain in the middle of his shirt.
They both seemed to be smiling and laughing as they took their stroll around South Beach on Saturday – despite a New York appeals court ruling on Thursday that Ivanka and her brother Donald Jr. must testify in their father Donald Trump’s fraud investigation.
The former president and his children had been fighting subpoenas from New York State Attorney General Letitia James’ office seeking depositions amid accusations the Trump Organization engaged in fraudulent financial tactics.
But judges on the appellate division of New York state’s trial court upheld a February 17 ruling by state Supreme Court Judge Arthur Engoron that they must testify.
Former first daughter Ivanka Trump and her husband Jared Kushner looked sporty as they took their dog, Winter, on a walk through Miami on Saturday
At one point, Jared could be seen touching Ivanka’s back as they walked, with Jared’s sweat leaving marks on his shirt
The couple’s dog, Winter, was seen panting as she strolled alongside them in South Beach on Saturday
Ivanka had been trying to fight the subpoena from Attorney General Letitia James’ office since it was handed down last year
The couple seemed to be smiling and laughing despite a New York appeals court judge ruling on Thursday that Ivanka must testify in the state’s fraud investigation into her father’s organization
Ivanka and her brother were first subpoenaed by James’ office in the investigation of their father’s fraud trial last year, with prosecutors arguing the Trump Organization had knowingly misrepresented financial information in order to obtain favorable loans and other deals for over a decade.
The siblings soon challenged the order in court, claiming that any information her team gains could be unfairly used in a separate but parallel criminal probe being run by the Manhattan District Attorney’s office.
But on Thursday, Engoron ruled ‘The existence of a criminal investigation does not preclude civil discovery of related facts, at which a party may exercise the privilege against self-inclusion.’
Such a ruling means James would be able to bring a civil lawsuit against Trump using the deposition if evidence of wrongdoing was found. She could not file criminal charges due to the nature of her probe.
‘Once again, the courts have ruled that Donald Trump must comply with our lawful investigation into his financial dealings,’ James said in a statement following the decision.
‘We will continue to follow the facts of this case and ensure that no one can evade the law.’
She claimed earlier in the year to have uncovered significant evidence of Trump’s company inflating the value of their properties to appear better to banks and then lowering them to reduce tax bills, and tweeted on Thursday: ‘Our investigation will continue undeterred because no one is above the law. ‘
New York Attorney General Letitia James has been investigating the Trump Organization since 2019. She subpoenaed Donald Trump and his two eldest children late last year
The criminal investigation, which had begun under former District Attorney Cyrus Vance, meanwhile, has lost steam in recent months after it was taken over by new DA Alvin Bragg.
Bragg said in a statement last month that the investigation is still ongoing, but gave few if any details on its progress. A grand jury impaneled for the probe expired at the end of April without any public attempts to extend it.
Trump has on multiple occasions dismissed both investigations as ‘witch hunts,’ and disparaged James herself as ‘racist’ in recent statements about her inquiry.
But in February, Engoron said that the Trump trio’s argument that testifying in James’ probe would violate his right against self-inclusion in the criminal probe completely misses the mark.
He wrote that their claim ‘overlooks the salient fact that they have an absolute right to refuse to answer questions that they claim may incriminate them.’
While the former president stepped back from running the company before coming to the White House, his son Donald Trump Jr. is still an executive vice president there.
Ivanka Trump left the company in 2017 to be an adviser in her father’s presidential administration alongside husband Jared Kushner.
His second-oldest son is also a Trump Organization executive – Eric Trump had already been forced to sit down under oath with James’ investigators.
Trump, seen here at a rally in Wyoming on Saturday, was forced to fork over $ 110,000 to James’ office as part of a deal to expunge a contempt charge over another subpoena
James began her investigation in 2019, after former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen stipulated to the Trump Organization’s allegedly illicit business practices before Congress.
Earlier this month, Trump was forced to fork over $ 110,000 to James’ office as part of a deal to expunge a contempt charge over another subpoena to hand over financial documents in the inquiry.
Trump and his attorney had maintained that he did not have the records James was asking for and that he had handed over everything else, while she contended that his reasons were inadequate.
Engoron wound up siding with James, charging Trump with contempt of court and charging him $ 10,000 for every day the documents were not produced.
The former president has previously accused James, a Democrat, of investigating him out of political animus. But those accusations have so far not been held up in court.
The New York appellate court on Thursday said James had uncovered ‘significant volumes of evidence’ in her investigation.
The filing also stated that Trump and children ‘have not identified any similarly implicated corporation that was not investigated or any executives of such a corporation who were not deposed.’
‘Therefore, appellants have failed to demonstrate that they were treated differently from any similarly situated persons,’ it states.