A New York appellate court has thrown out the $464 million civil fraud penalty imposed on former U.S. President Donald Trump, ruling that the amount was excessive and violated the Eighth Amendment of the U.S Constitution, which prohibits excessive fines.

The fine had originally been handed down by Judge Arthur Engoron in February 2024, after finding that Trump, alongside his sons Donald Jr. and Eric Trump, had fraudulently inflated the value of assets to secure favorable loans and insurance deals.

In addition to the financial penalty, the original ruling included a three-year ban on Trump from operating any businesses in New York, a decision he had described as a “corporate death sentence.”

On Thursday, the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court upheld the fraud ruling itself but said the magnitude of the penalty imposed was disproportionate.

“The court agrees with the finding of fraud,” the ruling stated, “but the imposed penalty violates constitutional protections against excessive fines.”

New York Attorney General Letitia James, who filed the original suit, may still appeal the new ruling to the New York Court of Appeals, the state’s highest court.

Trump had consistently pushed back against the charges, labeling the case a politically motivated witch hunt aimed at undermining his 2024 presidential campaign. The financial penalties were already accruing interest as he pursued appeals.

Reacting to the ruling, Donald Trump Jr. celebrated the outcome on X (formerly Twitter), calling it a “massive win.”

“New York Appeals Court has just THROWN OUT President Trump’s $500+ Million civil fraud penalty! It was always a witch hunt… and even a left-leaning NY appeals court agrees! NO MORE LAWFARE!”

During the trial proceedings, which were conducted without a jury in accordance with New York state law, Trump alleged the case was being driven by the Biden administration in an effort to damage him politically.

Since the case was civil, not criminal, Trump was never at risk of jail time.

At the 9th Tokyo International Conference on African Development (TICAD9) in Yokohama, Japan, President Bola Tinubu made a strong appeal for reforms within the United Nations Security Council to grant Africa permanent representation.

Speaking at the plenary session focused on peace and stability, Tinubu insisted that Africa deserves two permanent seats on the council, complete with all the privileges, including the veto power.

He further emphasized the need for additional non-permanent seats for the continent, aligning with the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration.

“Nigeria firmly believes that Africa’s call for equitable and just representation at the UN Security Council is both reasonable and long overdue,” Tinubu stated.

“Africa should have two permanent seats with full privileges and additional non-permanent seats to reflect its growing influence.”

The President also took time to commend the Nigerian armed forces for their recent successes in combating insurgency and criminal activities, describing these achievements as pivotal for the country’s development and stability.

However, Tinubu warned that military victories alone are insufficient for lasting peace. Addressing root causes such as poverty, inequality, and exclusion is essential.

He highlighted innovative peace-building efforts, including recent mediation linked with economic investments in the Democratic Republic of Congo, as promising models.

“Nigeria’s courageous armed forces can win battles, but true justice for their sacrifice comes when governments tackle not just terrorism but also its underlying causes,” Tinubu noted.

He called on African nations and international partners to foster market-driven collaborations rather than relying on traditional aid, urging a shift towards sustainable economic partnerships that transcend outdated approaches.

The conference also saw Japanese Prime Minister pledging $5.5 billion in support for African development, underscoring the global commitment to the continent’s progress.

Uganda has entered into a new agreement with the United States to receive migrants who have been denied asylum in the US but cannot return to their countries of origin, according to a senior government official.

The country’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs made the announcement Thursday, saying the arrangement is a “temporary” one, and will not apply to individuals with criminal records or unaccompanied minors.

“The agreement is in respect of Third Country Nationals who may not be granted asylum in the United States, but are reluctant to or may have concerns about returning to their countries of origin,” said Vincent Bagiire, the ministry’s permanent secretary, in a post on X (formerly Twitter).

He added that Uganda prefers the individuals transferred under the deal to be from African countries, and that detailed implementation procedures are still being worked out.

This development comes just a day after Ugandan officials denied reports of any such agreement.

Now confirmed, it aligns Uganda with other East African countries; Rwanda and South Sudan that have also signed similar controversial migration arrangements with the US.

The policy is part of US President Donald Trump’s administration push to accelerate deportations of undocumented migrants, especially those whose countries of origin either cannot or will not receive them.

Uganda already hosts Africa’s largest refugee population, with over 1.7 million refugees as of 2025, according to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).

Many have fled conflict and instability in Sudan, South Sudan, and the Democratic Republic of Congo.

While the UN has praised Uganda’s open-door refugee policy, rights advocates are raising fresh concerns about the implications of this new agreement.

Critics say such deportation deals may violate international law by exposing migrants to potential torture, abduction, or persecution especially when returned to third countries with limited resources or fragile institutions.

The US has already come under scrutiny for similar arrangements, including a recent case where eight migrant criminals were deported to South Sudan, of which only one was a South Sudanese national. Despite legal battles in US courts, South Sudan accepted custody of the group.

Earlier this month, Rwanda also confirmed it would accept up to 250 migrants under a US-backed plan. Details of that agreement remain scarce.

Although the Trump administration defends these arrangements as necessary due to the refusal of some countries to repatriate their citizens, human rights organisations continue to voice strong opposition.

“These deportations may place people at severe risk,” one rights advocate warned, citing previous cases where migrants ended up detained in harsh conditions before being returned to unstable environments.

For now, both Washington and Kampala are reportedly finalizing how the Uganda agreement will be implemented.