Andrew Cuomo is asking the Manhattan Supreme Court to force his former New York constituents to foot the bill for his legal fees.
Back in 2021, a New York state trooper filed a federal lawsuit alleging that the then New York governor, who resigned following a slew of sexual assault allegations, had sexually harassed and inappropriately touched her.
According to The New York Daily News, New York State Attorney General Letitia James rejected Cuomo’s request for a taxpayer-funded defense against the trooper’s claims.
Andrew M Cuomo v Letitia Ja… by New York Daily News
Trending:
In response, on Wednesday, Cuomo filed suit against James “for failing to provide him with legal representation after one of his accusers took him to court.”
Cuomo filed his lawsuit against James exactly one year, to the day, after announcing his resignation from the governor’s office.
The former governor’s lawyers claim James’s denial was a dereliction of duty, “arbitrary, capricious, contrary to the plain text of the statute, biased, personally and politically conflicted.”
In official court documents from the suit, Cuomo’s lawyers claim that, since the alleged actions took place while he was acting as governor, he therefore is entitled to a taxpayer-funded defense.
Do you think New York taxpayers should pay for Cuomo’s defense?
Yes: 0% (0 Votes)
No: 0% (0 Votes)
The New York attorney general’s office, however, disagrees.
“Sexually harassing young women who work for you is not part of anyone’s job description,” said Delaney Kemper, a spokeswoman for James.
“Taxpayers should not have to pony up for legal bills that could reach millions of dollars, so Mr. Cuomo’s lawyer can attack survivors of his abuse.”
James’s office conducted an investigation into allegations of sexual harassment made against Cuomo.
Published Aug. 3, 2021, the investigation detailed the allegations made by 11 separate parties, some named, others unnamed, against the former governor.
In its conclusion, the report found “that the Governor sexually harassed a number of State employees.”
This harassment included “unwelcome and unwanted touching” and “numerous offensive and sexually suggestive comments.”
“We find that such conduct was part of a pattern of behavior that extended to his interactions with others outside of State government,” the report said.
“In addition, we conclude that the culture of fear and intimidation, the normalization of inappropriate comments and interactions and the poor enforcement of the policies and safeguards, contributed to the sexual harassment, retaliation and an overall hostile work environment in the Executive Chamber.”
