President Donald Trump just took a million-dollar hit from a federal appeals court over a lawsuit that’s been deemed a waste of everyone’s time.
Politico reported that the Atlanta-based 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld a hefty penalty of nearly $1 million against Trump and his attorney Alina Habba for filing what the court called a baseless legal action against Hillary Clinton, former FBI Director James Comey, and others back in 2022.
In 2022, Trump and Habba launched a lawsuit claiming a sprawling conspiracy of racketeering tied to allegations about Trump’s 2016 campaign and supposed Russian connections.
The suit accused Clinton, Comey, and a host of others of fabricating claims to trigger investigations like the one led by special counsel Robert Mueller. It was a bold swing, but it didn’t land.
Fast forward to January 2023, when U.S. District Judge Donald Middlebrooks, based in West Palm Beach, Florida, threw out the case and slapped Trump and Habba with sanctions to cover legal fees for Clinton, the Democratic National Committee, and others. That penalty? A cool $1 million meant to send a message about clogging up the courts.
Trump wasn’t ready to let it go, appealing to the 11th Circuit to revive the lawsuit and ditch the fine. But the court, in a unanimous ruling by a three-judge panel including Chief Judge William Pryor Jr., a Trump appointee, and a Biden pick, said no dice. The decision wasn’t even close.
Speaking of Chief Judge Pryor, a George W. Bush appointee who penned the 36-page opinion, he didn’t hold back. “Many of Trump’s and Habba’s legal arguments were indeed frivolous,” Pryor wrote. Well, there’s a judicial burn for the ages—calling out a lawsuit as little more than a paper tiger.
Pryor also pointed out that the original district judge rightly factored in Trump’s history of what he called a “pattern of misusing the courts” when deciding on sanctions.
That’s not just a slap on the wrist; it’s a full-on lecture about respecting the legal system’s purpose. One has to wonder if this will prompt a rethink on future filings.
In another sharp jab, Pryor’s opinion labeled the lawsuit an “abuse of judicial resources.” Ouch—when a conservative-leaning judge uses that kind of language, it’s a signal that even Trump’s allies on the bench aren’t buying what he’s selling. This isn’t about politics; it’s about principle.
Now, let’s talk about Alina Habba, who was Trump’s lead counsel on this Russia-related legal misadventure as a private attorney.
She’s since moved up in the world, briefly named as the top federal prosecutor in New Jersey earlier this year, though that appointment hit its own legal snags. Her role here, though, paints a picture of loyalty meeting liability.
Habba’s temporary prosecutor gig faced its own drama when a judge ruled in August that an attempt to extend her term was against the rules.
The Justice Department is still fighting that call, but it’s another layer of complication for a figure already tied to this million-dollar mess. Her trajectory seems to mirror the turbulence of Trump’s legal battles.
Meanwhile, neither the White House, Trump’s legal team, nor Habba herself had any immediate comment on the court’s ruling. That silence speaks volumes—perhaps they’re regrouping after this latest defeat in a string of judicial setbacks. One can only speculate on the strategy huddle happening behind closed doors.
This isn’t even the only recent loss for Trump in the 11th Circuit. Just last week, a separate panel, including two of his own appointees, shut down his attempt to resurrect a lawsuit against CNN over their use of a certain phrase tied to the 2020 election controversy. It’s a rough patch for courtroom wins.
From a conservative angle, there’s a real frustration here—not with Trump’s tenacity, which many admire, but with the risk of overplaying a hand in the courts.
The judiciary isn’t a political sandbox; it’s a place for serious grievances, not every perceived slight. Squandering resources on long-shot cases can dilute legitimate fights against progressive overreach.