How were the rescheduled depositions of Donald Trump, Ivanka Trump, and Donald Jr. conducted after Ivana Trump's funeral, and what did reporters document about their testimony?
Executive summary
The New York attorney general’s office temporarily postponed court‑ordered depositions of Donald Trump, Ivanka Trump and Donald Trump Jr. after Ivana Trump’s death, then rescheduled private, in‑office interviews that reporters later reported had been completed for Ivanka and Donald Jr.; those media accounts say neither invoked the Fifth Amendment during their testimony, but detailed transcript material was not released publicly [1] [2] [3]. Reporting establishes the depositions were out‑of‑court, under oath and nonpublic, and many factual details about the substance of testimony remain unavailable to journalists because the AG’s process and sources limit disclosure [4] [5] [6].
1. How the postponement came about and the rescheduling framework
When Ivana Trump was found dead in mid‑July 2022, the New York attorney general’s office agreed to a last‑minute request from the Trumps’ counsel to adjourn the depositions that had been scheduled to begin the following day, calling the delay “temporary” and saying the interviews would be rescheduled “as soon as possible,” while giving no new dates at the time [1] [7] [6]. Court filings earlier in June had already reaffirmed that the three were obligated to appear, and the AG’s probe into the Trump Organization was proceeding under a court‑ordered discovery schedule; the pause was therefore procedural and limited to accommodate the family bereavement rather than a change in the legal obligation to testify [5] [2].
2. The mechanics of the later depositions: private, under oath, and not in open court
When reporters later covered the rescheduled interviews, every account emphasized that these were depositions conducted by investigators in the AG’s office — out‑of‑court questioning under oath rather than public courtroom testimony — and not televised or live streamed; Reuters and other outlets made clear the sessions would “not be conducted in public,” consistent with standard civil investigative practice [4] [2]. News outlets reported the sessions were expected to conclude within a short window after rescheduling and that the AG’s office had the authority to compel testimony under subpoena; those procedural facts frame why journalists relied on anonymous sources and AG statements rather than a public record [5] [4].
3. What reporters documented about what was said — the limits and the headline takeaways
Multiple outlets later reported that Ivanka Trump and Donald Trump Jr. did sit for questioning before the AG’s investigators and, according to sources, “neither pleaded the Fifth” — an explicit contrast drawn repeatedly to Eric Trump, who had invoked the Fifth Amendment over 500 times during his 2020 deposition, answering only background questions then [3] [5]. Those accounts, however, did not publish granular details of the Trumps’ answers; reporters noted the lack of invocation of the Fifth but did not have access to verbatim transcripts or comprehensive summaries released by the AG’s office, meaning public reporting captured posture and presence more than evidentiary content [3] [4].
4. What reporters and the AG said — competing narratives and implicit agendas
Coverage balanced the AG office’s procedural statements with the family’s legal posture: Letitia James’ office framed the adjournment and subsequent depositions as routine steps in an ongoing civil probe and stressed the obligation to answer under subpoena, while Trump allies and legal representatives characterized the broader inquiry as politically motivated — a “witch hunt” in some Trump‑aligned accounts — which helps explain both the defense focus on timing around personal bereavement and the high media scrutiny of whether witnesses would invoke constitutional protections [2] [8]. Reporters cited anonymous sources for claims about whether witnesses asserted the Fifth; those sourcing choices reflect the AG’s control over what investigators disclose and the Trumps’ interest in limiting public exposure.
5. What remains unknown and why reporting cannot fill those gaps
Contemporary reporting shows that while the schedule and the basic outcomes (postponement, rescheduling, private depositions completed for Ivanka and Don Jr., and no Fifth‑Amendment pleas reported) are documented, journalists did not obtain full transcripts or comprehensive descriptions of the substance of testimony; the AG’s civil investigation process and the private nature of depositions mean much of what the Trumps said remains sealed from public view unless the AG chooses to quote or file portions in court [4] [6]. That evidentiary opacity should temper confident public conclusions about the significance of what reporters documented.