INDIANAPOLIS -- Donald Trump backtracked attacks against a Hoosier-born judge of Mexican descent on Tuesday, saying his comments had been "misconstrued."
Trump has repeatedly claimed that Indiana native Judge Gonzalo Curiel should be "disqualified" from presiding over lawsuits against his Trump University real estate school because of perceived "bias" due to his Mexican heritage.
"He's a member of a club or society very strongly pro-Mexican, which is all fine," Trump said in an interview with ABC News. "But I say he's got bias. I want to build a wall. I'm going to build a wall."
In an interview with CNN's Jake Tapper, Trump further defended his comments. Tapper asked him pointedly: "If you are saying he cannot do his job because of his race, is that not the definition of racism?"
To that, Trump replied, "No, I don't think so at all.
Despite being roundly condemned by members of his own party – including House Speaker Paul Ryan, Sen. Ben Sasse of Nebraska, and Indiana Sen. Dan Coats and Gov. Mike Pence – ABC News reported that Trump was doubling down and ordering surrogates to continue defending his attacks against Curiel.
MORE | Sen. Dan Coats, Gov. Mike Pence weigh in on Trump judge comments
According to ABC News, Trump told supporters in a conference call Monday to "throw out" an order from his campaign to stop talking about the judge.
Call 6 Investigates found a Hoosier complainant is among those challenging Trump University. Watch Rafael Sanchez's report on that below:
On Tuesday, Trump released a lengthy statement addressing the issue, claiming his comments had been "misconstrued as a categorical attack against people of Mexican heritage."
"I am friends with and employ thousands of people of Mexican and Hispanic descent," Trump wrote. "The American justice system relies on fair and impartial judges. All judges should be held to that standard. I do not feel that one’s heritage makes them incapable of being impartial, but, based on the rulings that I have received in the Trump University civil case, I feel justified in questioning whether I am receiving a fair trial."
Trump has come under fire throughout his campaign for perceived racist comments and attitudes against Mexicans.
In a speech in June 2015, Trump said, “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”
He also drew backlash last month when he posted a picture of himself eating a taco bowl on Cinco de Mayo with the caption "I love Hispanics!"
MORE | Trump's Cinco de Mayo 'I love Hispanics' post draws fire | Mexican president: Trump language like that of Hitler
Despite his ardent defense of his comments, Trump appears to be heeding the GOP's calls for him to back off Curiel. At the end of his latest statement, the real estate mogul says he "does not intent to comment on this matter any further."
Find Trump's full statement below:
It is unfortunate that my comments have been misconstrued as a categorical attack against people of Mexican heritage. I am friends with and employ thousands of people of Mexican and Hispanic descent. The American justice system relies on fair and impartial judges. All judges should be held to that standard. I do not feel that one’s heritage makes them incapable of being impartial, but, based on the rulings that I have received in the Trump University civil case, I feel justified in questioning whether I am receiving a fair trial.
Over the past few weeks, I have watched as the media has reported one inaccuracy after another concerning the ongoing litigation involving Trump University. There are several important facts the public should know and that the media has failed to report.
Throughout the litigation my attorneys have continually demonstrated that students who participated in Trump University were provided a substantive, valuable education based upon a curriculum developed by professors from Northwestern University, Columbia Business School, Stanford University and other respected institutions. And, the response from students was overwhelming. Over a five year period, more than 10,000 paying students filled out surveys giving the courses high marks and expressing their overwhelming satisfaction with Trump University’s programs. For example:
Former student Tarla Makaeff, the original plaintiff in the litigation, not only completed multiple surveys rating Trump University’s three-day seminar “excellent” in every category, but also praised Trump University’s mentorship program in a glowing 5 plus minute video testimonial. When asked “how could Trump University help to meet [her] goals”, she simply stated “[c]ontinue to offer great classes.” Once the plaintiffs’ lawyers realized how disastrous a witness she was, they asked to have her removed from the case. Over my lawyers’ objections, the judge granted the plaintiffs’ motion, but allowed the case to continue.
Art Cohen, a lead plaintiffs in the litigation, completed a survey in which he not only rated Trump University’s three-day seminar “excellent” in virtually every category, but went so far as to indicate that he would “attend another Trump University seminar” and even “recommend Trump University seminars to a friend.” When asked how Trump University could improve the seminar, Mr. Cohen’s only suggestion was to “[h]ave lunch sandwiches brought in” and make the lunch break 45 minutes.
Former student Bob Giullo, who has been critical of Trump University in numerous interviews and negative advertisements from my political opponents, also expressed his satisfaction, rating Trump University’s programs “excellent” in every category. When asked how Trump University could improve its programs, Mr. Giullo simply asked that students be provided “more comfortable chairs.”
Indeed, these are just a few of literally thousands of positive surveys, all of which can be viewed online at www.98percentapproval.com.
For those students who decided that Trump University’s programs were not for them, the company had a generous refund policy, offering a full refund to any student who asked for their money back within 3 days of signing up for a program or by the end of the first day of any multi-day program, whichever came later.
Normally, legal issues in a civil case would be heard in a neutral environment. However, given my unique circumstances as nominee of the Republican Party and the core issues of my campaign that focus on illegal immigration, jobs and unfair trade, I have concerns as to my ability to receive a fair trial.
I am fighting hard to bring jobs back to the United States. Many companies – like Ford, General Motors, Nabisco, Carrier – are moving production to Mexico. Drugs and illegal immigrants are also pouring across our border. This is bad for all Americans, regardless of their heritage.
Due to what I believe are unfair and mistaken rulings in this case and the Judge’s reported associations with certain professional organizations, questions were raised regarding the Obama appointed Judge’s impartiality. It is a fair question. I hope it is not the case.
While this lawsuit should have been dismissed, it is now scheduled for trial in November. I do not intend to comment on this matter any further. With all of the thousands of people who have given the courses such high marks and accolades, we will win this case!
Donald J. Trump
