During oral arguments on Thursday, one judge described the case as "troubling" and expressed concerns about potential "mission creep."

In the original trial, Judge Arthur Engoron determined that Trump, his sons Donald Jr. and Eric, and The Trump Organization had illegally inflated the value of Trump's assets and net worth to secure favorable business deals. The judgment led to Trump being fined $464 million and banned from the New York real estate industry for three years, a sum now grown to $489 million with interest. Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump were each fined over $4 million and banned from New York business activities for two years.

On Thursday, attorneys for Trump sought to overturn the judgment before the New York Appellate Court. The five-judge panel interrogated Deputy New York Solicitor General Judith Vale about the absence of direct victims in the case and the substantial financial penalty that had been imposed. Justice Peter Moulton commented on the "immense penalty," questioning how it related to the harm caused when the involved parties had apparently been satisfied with their transactions.

Vale defended the hefty fine, stating, "There was a lot of fraud and illegality," and highlighted the significant benefits Trump had allegedly gained from his conduct. Moulton raised concerns about "mission creep," suggesting that the attorney general's intervention might have exceeded its original purpose. He inquired about the limitations on the attorney general's authority in such private transactions.

Explaining further, Vale argued that such transactions had to be "related and relevant" to the business and possess the capacity to deceive. She added that hidden risks could harm the market and its honest participants.

Justice Llinet Rosado questioned the method the New York attorney general used to calculate the disgorgement Trump was required to pay. Vale explained it was based on the real interest Trump would have faced on bank loans had he been truthful in his applications.

New York Attorney General Letitia James had filed a counter-argument to Trump’s appeal on August 22, stating that the trial judge was entirely persuaded of Trump’s fraudulent activities. James and her legal team emphasized the trial's thorough evaluation and consequent findings of criminal and illegal conduct. The developments in the appellate court now put significant emphasis on how the case will unfold further.