Which Trump family members were subpoenaed in the New York AG’s civil investigation and what did their depositions reveal?

1. Who was subpoenaed and why the subpoenas mattered

New York’s civil probe into whether the Trump Organization misstated asset values led Attorney General Letitia James to issue testimonial and document subpoenas to Donald Trump and his two eldest children, Ivanka Trump and Donald Trump Jr., with the AG’s office saying it sought testimony about valuations and related business practices ^{[1] [2] [7]}. The subpoenas were notable because the civil inquiry overlapped with criminal investigations led by the Manhattan district attorney, creating unusual legal stakes when potential witnesses are also subjects of parallel criminal inquiries ^{[8] [7]}.

2. The courtroom fight to enforce testimony

Trump and his children fought the subpoenas in court, arguing that forcing testimony in a civil probe risked self‑incrimination in the parallel criminal matter and that the AG’s investigation was politically motivated; judges, including Justice Arthur Engoron, disagreed and ordered compliance, concluding the Trumps could invoke constitutional protections during testimony where appropriate ^{[3] [5] [4]}. The state appeals process repeatedly rejected broad stays of the depositions, and the judge enforced schedules for sworn testimony in mid‑2022, with depositions set for July and subsequent sessions in August and beyond ^{[9] [6]}.

3. What the depositions that are public showed (Eric and Donald Trump)

One of the clearest public windows into the probe came from Eric Trump’s 2020 deposition, where court records show he repeatedly invoked his Fifth‑Amendment right against self‑incrimination—more than 500 times over roughly six hours—refusing to answer many substantive questions ^[4]. Later depositions of Donald Trump were marked by a similar pattern: Reuters and other reporting note that in an August 2022 deposition Trump invoked his Fifth Amendment rights more than 400 times when questioned under oath in the AG’s civil case ^[6]. Those invocation counts are themselves factual revelations used by the AG to argue that witnesses were avoiding answering substantive questions about valuation and accounting practices ^[5].

4. What the AG’s filings and related testimony alleged (context from other witnesses)

Although the Trumps’ own public testimony was often limited by Fifth‑Amendment invocations or legal fights, the AG’s court filings relied on other witness testimony and documents to allege specific irregularities—most prominently the claim that the size and value of Trump’s Manhattan apartment had been materially overstated, a discrepancy the AG linked to testimony from former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg and other records describing asset inflation ^[10]. James’ office argued these and similar discrepancies supported civil fraud claims and justified compelling testimony from the family ^{[10] [5]}.

5. Limits of the public record and legal implications

Public reporting and court filings make clear who was subpoenaed and show that some depositions yielded heavy Fifth‑Amendment invocations, but the record available in these sources does not contain a public transcript showing detailed substantive answers from Ivanka Trump or Donald Trump Jr., nor does it provide an exhaustive catalogue of every deposition detail the AG may have obtained in closed filings ^{[1] [2]}. The AG’s civil case proceeded using documentary evidence and other witness statements while recognizing defendants’ constitutional rights to refuse self‑incriminating testimony; those legal dynamics shaped both the substance and the limits of what depositions revealed publicly ^{[5] [3]}.