Trump and the cancer kids lawsuit
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
The New York Attorney General sued the Donald J. Trump Foundation in 2018 alleging it misused charity funds for business and political purposes; the dispute was resolved in 2019 with Trump ordered to pay $2 million in damages, the foundation dissolved, and mandatory training imposed on his children [1] [2]. Separate reporting questions handling of the Eric Trump Foundation’s fundraising for pediatric cancer and social-media claims that the Trump family was “disallowed from operating ANY charity” in New York are inaccurate or conflated according to multiple fact-checks [3] [4].
1. What the New York lawsuit actually alleged and how it ended
The New York Attorney General’s 2018 complaint accused the Donald J. Trump Foundation of operating as an arm of Mr. Trump’s business and political interests — using charitable assets to pay Trump’s legal obligations, promote his hotels, buy personal items and support his presidential campaign — and sought relief including barring certain family members from charity roles [1]. The case was resolved in November 2019: the foundation was ordered to dissolve under court supervision, Trump paid $2 million in court-ordered damages distributed to eight charities, and his children underwent mandatory charity governance training [2].
2. Where the “kids cancer” story fits — two separate threads
Reporting and long-form investigations have examined Eric Trump’s charity events that raised money for pediatric cancer causes and have criticized how costs and billing were handled — for example, Forbes reported on shifting benefits and billing arrangements tied to the family’s golf events supporting kids’ cancer causes [5]. Those critical accounts are distinct from the Attorney General’s suit against the Donald J. Trump Foundation; fact-checkers emphasize the two threads were often conflated in social posts alleging the family “stole” from a kids’ cancer charity and were barred from running charities in New York [3] [4].
3. What fact-checkers concluded about viral claims
Snopes and FactCheck.org both flagged social posts that claimed the Trump family had been barred from operating any charity in New York because they stole from a children’s cancer charity as false or misleading. Snopes updated its rating after the 2019 court resolution and clarified that the claim wrongly mixes separate allegations and legal outcomes [3]. FactCheck.org similarly said the social posts distorted facts by conflating the Trump Foundation case with other scrutiny of Eric Trump’s fundraising [4].
4. What was enforced — remedies, not blanket bans
The court-ordered remedies targeted the Trump Foundation and imposed specific penalties and oversight (dissolution, payment of damages, training). The final resolution did not amount to an across-the-board permanent ban on the Trump family running any and all charities in New York; fact-checkers note that social-media phrasing overstated and misrepresented what the court achieved [3] [4].
5. Why confusion spread — overlapping criticisms and vivid examples
Multiple strong narratives made the story combustible: investigative pieces documenting questionable billing between family businesses and charity events (Forbes), the AG’s civil lawsuit focused on misuse of one foundation (NY AG releases), and separate scrutiny of Eric Trump’s fundraising for pediatric cancer created parallel critiques that social posts compressed into a single explosive claim [5] [1] [2]. That compression turned nuanced legal and reporting distinctions into a simple, viral—and inaccurate—message [4].
6. What current reporting does not say
Available sources in this packet do not mention any subsequent permanent, state-wide prohibition explicitly barring Donald Trump or his children from ever operating charities in New York beyond the remedies imposed in the 2019 settlement; nor do they document a court finding that the family “stole” from a single kids’ cancer charity as the basis for a statewide ban [3] [4] [2]. If you’ve seen a short viral claim stating otherwise, that claim is contradicted by the cited fact-checks and the AG’s press release [3] [4] [2].
7. Takeaway for readers
The settled, documented facts are clear: the Trump Foundation was dissolved, court-ordered damages were paid, and certain remedial steps were imposed [2]. Criticism of Eric Trump’s cancer-focused fundraising exists in investigative reporting, but it is a separate stream of reporting and was not the legal basis for a blanket ban on the family running charities [5] [4]. When you encounter pithy social claims about “stealing from a kids’ cancer charity” or an outright ban, rely on the AG’s statement and contemporary fact-checking rather than the compressed versions that circulated online [2] [3].