The figure comes from Trump’s deposition in the New York attorney general’s fraud case, not from a dramatic courtroom refusal at trial. In civil litigation, that distinction matters.
Donald Trump invoked the Fifth Amendment 440 times during deposition testimony in the New York civil fraud case, and New York Judge Arthur Engoron counted how many times he invoked it in his written decision. The figure matters now because the number is often repeated as shorthand for the case, but it describes a pretrial deposition, not a moment when Trump took the witness stand at trial and refused answer after answer.
It also matters because in civil litigation, silence can carry courtroom consequences that it usually would not in a criminal trial. The count is legally significant, but it is not the same thing as a confession.
The count was 440
Engoron, the judge who presided over the New York attorney general’s civil fraud case against Trump, cited the number in connection with Trump’s sworn deposition. The deposition took place on Aug. 10, 2022, before the trial, as investigators questioned Trump about his financial statements and business practices.
CBS News, which obtained video of portions of the deposition, reported that Trump invoked the Fifth Amendment for nearly four hours and repeatedly used the phrase “same answer” after stating that he would decline to respond on constitutional grounds. New York attorney general filings also described the number as more than 400 invocations.
Engoron’s 440 count has become the cleanest judicial reference point. It is a judge’s tally from the civil case record, not a social media estimate and not a number pulled from campaign rhetoric.
It happened in a deposition
The distinction between a deposition and a trial is easy to miss. A deposition is sworn testimony taken before trial, usually in a conference room or office, with lawyers questioning a witness under oath. It can later become evidence in court.
Trump’s deposition was part of New York Attorney General Letitia James’ investigation and lawsuit accusing Trump, the Trump Organization and others of inflating asset values on financial statements. James announced the lawsuit in September 2022, seeking penalties and restrictions on the company’s New York operations.
At the start of the deposition, Trump answered preliminary questions. Once questioning turned to his finances, he read a prepared statement calling the investigation politically motivated and said that anyone in his position who did not take the Fifth Amendment would be “a fool.”
After that, according to the video and filings, Trump largely repeated the same refusal rather than answering detailed questions about valuations, statements of financial condition and company records.
Why the Fifth mattered
The Fifth Amendment protects people from being compelled to give testimony that could incriminate them. It applies in criminal cases, but it can also be invoked in civil proceedings if truthful answers could expose a person to criminal risk.
That protection is real. Invoking it is not proof that a person committed a crime, and courts generally cannot treat it that way in a criminal case.
Civil cases work differently. Judges or juries may, in some circumstances, draw an adverse inference from a party’s refusal to answer questions. In plain English, a civil factfinder can sometimes consider silence as one piece of the evidentiary picture.
That is why the 440 count mattered to Engoron. The number did not decide the case by itself. But in a bench trial, where the judge also serves as factfinder, repeated refusals can shape how the court evaluates the surrounding evidence.
Trump’s defense was political
Trump has denied wrongdoing throughout the New York civil fraud case. He and his lawyers have described the lawsuit as politically driven and have attacked James, a Democrat, as biased against him.
That argument is central to how Trump presents the Fifth Amendment issue. His position has been that the investigation itself was unfair, and that asserting constitutional rights was a prudent response to a hostile legal environment.
James’ office took the opposite view. The attorney general argued that Trump and his company used inflated financial statements to gain advantages with lenders and insurers. The state’s case focused on documents, valuations and testimony from multiple witnesses, not only on Trump’s refusal to answer deposition questions.
The competing views explain why the same number lands so differently depending on who is citing it. To Trump’s critics, 440 looks like evasion. To Trump and his supporters, it reflects a defendant using a constitutional shield in a case he says should never have been brought.
What the number does not prove
The 440 figure is striking, but it has limits. It does not mean Trump invoked the Fifth Amendment 440 separate times at trial. It does not mean he was convicted of a crime in that case. The New York attorney general’s action was civil, not criminal.
It also does not mean every unanswered question was equally important. In a deposition, lawyers may ask many related questions, sometimes covering the same subject from different angles. A repeated “same answer” can pile up quickly across hours of questioning.
The useful way to read the number is narrower: Trump declined to answer a very large number of sworn questions in a deposition that later became part of a major civil fraud case. A judge then treated that pattern as relevant in assessing the case.
- The count: 440 Fifth Amendment invocations, according to Judge Arthur Engoron.
- The setting: Trump’s Aug. 10, 2022 deposition in the New York civil fraud investigation.
- The case type: Civil fraud, not a criminal prosecution.
- The legal effect: Potential adverse inference, not automatic liability.
The clean takeaway
The most accurate version is this: Trump invoked the Fifth Amendment 440 times during a deposition in the New York civil fraud case, according to the judge who later decided the case. That is more precise than saying only that he “took the Fifth” in the fraud trial.
The difference is not nitpicking. Depositions are part of litigation, and deposition testimony can matter greatly, but they are not the same as live trial testimony. The setting affects how readers should understand both the drama and the legal stakes.
The number endures because it compresses a complicated case into one vivid fact. The fuller story is less simple: a former president, a civil fraud lawsuit, a constitutional right, and a judge allowed to weigh silence differently than a criminal jury could.
Leave a Reply