It may represent the ultimate irony: The New York Attorney General, who notoriously attempted to “imprison Trump,” is currently engaged in a fierce re-election campaign overshadowed by her own legal issues.
Attorney General Letitia James is now subject to a federal investigation and is contending with a revitalized Republican challenger as the 2026 election approaches. In the meantime, Donald Trump serves as the President of the United States, and his Department of Justice is probing her for far more significant criminal allegations than those she levied against her perceived adversary.
In April, the Federal Housing Finance Agency alerted the Department of Justice regarding allegations that James misrepresented critical information on a mortgage application for a property in Brooklyn. Investigators assert that she may have falsified details about her full-time residency, the layout of the property, and her personal affiliations—potentially to obtain more favorable loan conditions.
Her legal representatives dismiss these allegations as trivial clerical mistakes, yet the FBI initiated a criminal inquiry in May. The conservative watchdog organization America First Legal has subsequently lodged ethics complaints, accusing James of misconduct. Her attorney characterized the allegations as politically motivated retaliation for her prosecutions of Trump and former Governor Andrew Cuomo.
At the same time, Republican attorney Michael Henry, who nearly defeated James in 2022 with 45% of the vote, is capitalizing on this situation. He has already garnered support from over 6,000 donors—1,200 of whom are eligible for public matching funds—enabling him to amplify his message throughout the state: reform the Attorney General’s office and remove political bias from its operations.
The political landscape in New York may be undergoing a transformation. Trump made unexpected gains in 2024, even in traditionally Democratic regions such as Brooklyn and Queens—James’s home territory. Suburban voters, concerned about crime and rising living expenses, are displaying a newfound receptiveness to GOP candidates.
Internal Democratic tensions are proving detrimental. Governor Kathy Hochul is currently confronted with a primary challenge from her own lieutenant governor, Antonio Delgado. James, who is closely associated with the party establishment, risks becoming entangled in the wider unrest within the party.
Trump, reigniting his conflict with James, has branded her as “corrupt” and “incompetent,” citing the mortgage investigation as evidence of bias within New York’s legal framework. His supporters are leveraging the inquiry to assert that James has misused her power for political advantage.
In spite of her national recognition and progressive achievements, James is now faced with a more pressing dilemma: not whether she can defeat her Republican opponent, but whether the citizens of New York still believe she deserves to retain her position.
James, the first Black woman to be elected to statewide office in New York, was previously regarded as a sure candidate for reelection after gaining national attention. Her prominent legal confrontations—particularly a civil fraud case that imposed nearly $500 million in penalties on Donald Trump’s business empire—solidified her reputation as a champion of progressive values.
However, that legacy is now at risk. She is on the verge of becoming an attorney general with a criminal conviction. This could result in substantial fines, public disgrace, and the possibility of disbarment. She may serve as a cautionary tale for other prosecutors who misuse their positions: what goes around, comes around.
CNN legal analyst Elie Honig remarked in an op-ed for the liberal New York Magazine that the legal challenges James is encountering with the Trump administration are self-inflicted, as she initially opted to weaponize the law against the president.
James initiated the situation when she campaigned for New York Attorney General and achieved victory in 2018, primarily on a clear platform urging, ‘Vote for me, fellow resistance warriors, and I’ll take down Trump.’ James tweeted that, if she were elected, she would be ‘leading the resistance against Donald Trump in NYC.’ She sought campaign contributions by promising to dismantle the presidency. Without having any evidence at her disposal, James asserted definitively that Trump ‘engaged in a pattern and practice of money laundering’ and ‘can be indicted for criminal offenses.’ The day following her election, still without any actual evidence, the newly appointed AG proclaimed, ‘We’re definitely going to sue him. We’re going to be a real pain in the ass. He’s going to know my name personally.’ For what reason? Who knows. Just something,” Honig remarked.
“James did indeed sue Trump, and for the time being, she won. Following a trial that resembled a circus, which centered on Trump’s consistent overvaluation of his assets in bank loan applications, New York State judge Arthur Engoron determined that Trump was civilly liable for fraud and imposed damages exceeding $500 million, including accruing interest. Throughout the trial, James made a series of highly inappropriate statements outside of court that would typically result in a prosecutor’s dismissal; at one point, she publicly labeled Trump and his family members as liars while they were under oath,” the legal analyst stated.
“Regardless of the judge’s ruling, James’s theory of liability was so weak that it barely masked her previously admitted intention to undermine Trump by any means necessary. The alleged victims of the fraud were multibillion-dollar banks that were fully repaid on their loans to the Trump Organization and profited millions through interest payments. Unsurprisingly, a panel from the New York appellate division expressed significant skepticism regarding James’s case, which lacked identifiable victims, and appears ready to either significantly reduce the verdict or dismiss it entirely,” he wrote.
