Donald Trump's legal team is asking U.S. District Court Judge Gonzalo Curiel to rule that lawyers and witnesses at the Trump University trial be prohibited from making any reference to "personal conduct accusations" leveled at Trump. | Getty Trump seeks to keep groping claims out of Trump University suit

A decade-old recording of Donald Trump making crude comments about women may already have done serious damage to his presidential campaign, but now Trump's lawyers are trying to make sure that and other revelations about his personal behavior don't doom his defense at a civil trial set to begin next month over alleged fraud in his Trump University real estate seminar program.

Trump's legal team is asking U.S. District Court Judge Gonzalo Curiel to rule that lawyers and witnesses at the Trump University trial be prohibited from making any reference to "audio and video recordings made or publicized during the campaign" as well as "personal conduct accusations" leveled at Trump.


Trump's attorneys also want to bar discussion of allegations that Trump may have paid no federal income taxes for as long as two decades, his personal charitable foundation, bankruptcies of various companies he owned or managed, and a series of comments he made alleging that Curiel was irredeemably biased because of his Latino background.

"Before trial begins in this case, prospective members of the jury will have the opportunity to cast their vote for President. It is in the ballot box where they are free to judge Mr. Trump based on all this and more. But it is in the jury box where they must judge him and this case only on evidence and argument relevant to the issues at hand," Trump lawyers Dan Petrocelli and David Kirman wrote in a motion filed late Thursday night.

"Evidence and argument relating to matters publicized during the presidential campaign, including statements by and about Mr. Trump, have no relevance to the issues before the jury and are otherwise inadmissible. Their intrusion into the trial carries an immediate and irreparable danger of extreme and irremediable prejudice to defendants, confusion of issues, and waste of time," Petrocelli and Kirman added. "Courts are required to ensure that the purpose for which the evidence is offered is more than just a sham for using it as proof of character."

Curiel has ordered a jury trial starting Nov. 28 in federal court in San Diego on one of two pending class-action lawsuits alleging that the Trump University program was deceptively marketed. The first case set for trial involves individuals who spent between about $1,500 and $35,000 on real estate seminars or a deluxe mentorship package on how to invest in real estate.

In the suits, plaintiffs' lawyers are leveling a series of fraud claims against Trump and Trump University, but only two are at issue in the case set for trial next month: that Trump University was falsely promoted as an accredited university and that the program advertised its instructors as handpicked by Trump, when they were not.

Trump is expected to be called as a witness by both sides at the trial, which was delayed in part to accommodate his presidential campaign. It's unclear whether the trial could be delayed further if Trump wins on Nov. 8. As a civil defendant, he would be entitled to sit at the defense table in the courtroom, but he's not obliged to attend the entire trial.

Both sides in the case filed pretrial motions Tuesday night jockeying for advantage by asking Curiel for advance rulings on potential evidence, usually seeking to exclude matters they fear the other side may bring up.

The plaintiffs in the case also made a politics-related request of the judge, asking him to rule out any questioning of witnesses' political affiliations or contributions. They're apparently concerned that Trump's lawyers may seek to discredit critical witnesses by saying that they're Democrats or took part in anti-Trump political activity.

The plaintiffs also asked that Trump's team be prohibited from referring to the fact that several lawyers affiliated with an earlier iteration of one of the law firms that filed the case pleaded guilty to federal felony charges and served prison time. None of those lawyers worked on the Trump University case or are currently affiliated with the plaintiffs' law firms.

In addition to discussion about the campaign, Trump's attorneys want to place off limits at the trial any mention of the financial condition of students who signed up for the Trump University program, including claims that some are now "hardly making enough to survive" or that the program preyed on "poor people."

Trump's attorneys called the hardship claims "inflammatory" and said they were irrelevant to whether students were or were not deceived.

The trial is expected to proceed in phases, with the first phase focused on whether the alleged deceptions took place and were material to decisions to sign up for the program. A second phase will address what damages were incurred.

Trump's legal team also wants to bar discussion of their client's struggle to get the Better Business Bureau to change an 'F' rating it gave the so-called university.

Amid the acrimony reflected in the motions filed Friday, there were some small points of agreement alongside further indications that the trial will be fiercely litigated, assuming the case isn't settled in the next five weeks. Both sides asked the judge to forbid telling jurors in the case about any "jury consultants, shadow jurors, and/or private investigators" the parties may have used or who may be present in court.