'No more tricks up the Trump legal team’s sleeves': Why the ex-president’s latest 'win' is temporary

When a five-judge New York appeals court panel on Monday significantly cut Donald Trump's $464 million bond amount in the New York civil fraud case down to $175 million, and gave him ten more days to pay up — just hours before the deadline, legal experts were astonished by "the major lifeline" thrown to the former president.

Former New York State Assistant Attorney General Tristan Snell "who successfully prosecuted the $25 million Trump University case," slammed the order as "special treatment," while ex-federal prosecutor and MSNBC legal analyst Glenn Kirschner said, "The verdict is in: the rules, the laws, and the Constitution do not apply to Donald Trump the way they apply to you and me."

However, in an op-ed published by The Daily Beast, legal ethics and civil procedure expert Ray Brescia suggests despite Monday's win, Trump is "still in deep legal trouble" when it comes to both of his New York cases.

READ MORE: $3 billion from Truth Social merger unlikely to fix Trump's money trouble

"Team Trump seemed to have won a bit of a victory in one," Brescia writes, "but certainly not in the other. While Trump’s camp is likely relieved that he doesn’t have to post a nearly half-billion-dollar bond to continue his appeal, the fact remains that both that case and the Stormy Daniels hush money case are still moving full steam ahead," he adds.

Additionally, Axios' Jacob Knutson and Ivana Saric pointed out in a March 25 report, "Trump's lawyers said last week that securing a bond that size has been 'impossible' after they approached more than two dozen companies and none were willing to cover the amount," while the New York Times noted, "More than 30 bond companies turned down his lawyers' requests to guarantee the bond."

Knutson and Saric emphasized, "State of play: No company would accept his real estate as collateral and would only accept cash or cash equivalents, his lawyers said. His inability to secure a bond under those terms at the very least suggests he lacks access to a large amount of liquid assets."

Furthermore, Brescia writes:

The appellate court in this case said earlier today that to appeal Justice [Arthur] Engoron’s decision, the defendants will still have to post a bond for roughly one-third of the full judgment.

The court did not rule on the merits of the underlying decision, nor did it indicate in any way that the court will reverse all or even any part of Justice Engoron’s prior ruling. What is more, one of the reasons the appeals court might have allowed the reduction of the bond was that much of the defendants’ assets are not all that difficult to find.

READ MORE: 'Easy mark': Why Trump’s $464 million bond failure makes him a 'massive national security risk'

The Associate Dean for Research and Intellectual Life at Albany Law School also notes:

While Trump can post a lower bond to allow him to appeal the $454 million judgment for alleged fraudulent business practices, his trial in the Stormy Daniels hush-money case will start mid-April, and there seem to be no more tricks up the Trump legal team’s sleeves to delay that from happening.

Brescia's full op-ed is available at this link.