The federal judge presiding over a lawsuit against Trump University — whom President-elect Donald Trump smeared during the GOP primary — said Wednesday in court documents that comments made by Trump, including those on the campaign trail, would not be automatically excluded as evidence in the case.
Trump’s attorneys last month asked that “Statements by or about Mr. Trump made or publicized during the campaign or otherwise outside of the adjudicative process” be inadmissible as evidence in the trial. They included in that category tweets and stump speeches, as well as comments made by his campaign surrogates. Additionally, they asked that “Comments about this case or the Court” be not considered in the case.
U.S. District Court Judge Gonzalo Curiel cited a “lack of specificity” in denying Trump’s request to issue a blanket ruling banning such evidence. “Defendants may renew their objection to specific testimony at trial,” Curiel added.
The lawsuit against Trump University claims that Trump and the organization defrauded its students. Back in May, Trump said Curiel was biased against him because he was “Mexican.” Curiel was born in Indiana.