Donald Trump has arrived for closing arguments in his New York civil fraud trial.

It comes after authorities responded to a bomb threat at the home of the judge who moved this week to prevent the former US president from delivering his own closing statements.

Authorities responded to the threat at Judge Arthur Engoron’s home on Long Island, a court official said.

The proceedings were not delayed.

Mr Trump, the leading contender for the Republican presidential nomination, has repeatedly disparaged the judge in the case, accusing him in a social media post on Wednesday night of working closely with the New York attorney general “to screw me”.

“At this moment the judge is not letting me make the summation because I’ll bring up things he doesn’t want to hear,” Mr Trump said as he walked into the courtroom, characterising the decision as “political interference”.

“This is a case that never should have been brought,” he said.

Mr Trump said he was still hoping he would be allowed to speak, but his lawyer did not raise the issue before launching into his own closing argument.

At 5.30am local time on Thursday, hours before the trial’s final day was set to begin, Nassau County police said they responded to a “swatting incident” at Judge Engoron’s Great Neck home.

Nothing amiss was found at the location, officials said.

The false report came days after a fake emergency call reporting a shooting at the home of the judge overseeing Mr Trump’s Capitol attack criminal case in Washington, DC.

The two incidents follow a spate of similar false reports at the homes of public officials in recent days.

Taking the bench a few minutes late, Judge Engoron made no mention of the incident at his home.

On Wednesday, Judge Engoron had nixed an unusual plan by Mr Trump to deliver his own closing remarks in the courtroom, in addition to summations from his legal team, after lawyers for the former president would not agree to the judge’s demand that he stick to “relevant” matters.

That left the last words to the lawyers in a trial over allegations that Mr Trump exaggerated his wealth on financial statements he provided to banks, insurance companies and others.

“Forty-four days of trial – not one witness came into this courtroom, your honour, and said there was fraud,” Trump lawyer Christopher Kise said.

New York attorney general Letitia James, a Democrat, wants the judge to impose 370 million dollars (£291 million) in penalties.

Mr Trump says he did nothing wrong, did not lie about his fortune and is the victim of political persecution.

The former president had hoped to make that argument personally, but the judge – initially open to the idea – said no after a Trump lawyer missed a deadline for agreeing to ground rules.

Among them, Judge Engoron warned that Mr Trump could not use his closing remarks to “deliver a campaign speech” or use the opportunity to impugn the judge and his staff.

“This entire case is a manufactured claim to pursue a political agenda,” Mr Kise said in his closing argument.

“It has been press releases and posturing but no evidence.”

Lawyers from Ms James’s office will deliver their closing argument on Thursday afternoon.

Mr Trump returned to court as a spectator on Thursday despite the death of his mother in-law, Amalija Knavs, and the launch of the presidential primary season on Monday with the Iowa caucus.

Since the trial began on October 2, Mr Trump has gone to court nine times to observe, give evidence and complain to TV cameras about the case, which he called a “witch hunt and a disgrace”.

He clashed with Judge Engoron and state lawyers during three-and-a-half hours in the witness box in November and remains under a limited gag order after making a disparaging and false social media post about the judge’s law clerk.

Thursday’s arguments are part of a busy legal and political stretch for Mr Trump.

On Tuesday, he was in court in Washington, DC, to watch appeals court arguments over whether he is immune from prosecution on charges that he plotted to overturn the 2020 election – one of four criminal cases against him.

Mr Trump has pleaded not guilty.

Ms James sued Mr Trump in 2022 under a state law that gives the state attorney general broad power to investigate allegations of persistent fraud in business dealings.

Judge Engoron decided some of the key issues before evidence began.

In a pre-trial ruling, he found that Mr Trump had committed years of fraud by lying about his riches on financial statements with tricks such as claiming his Trump Tower penthouse was nearly three times its actual size.

The trial involves six undecided claims, including allegations of conspiracy, insurance fraud and falsifying business records.

Mr Trump’s company and two of his sons, Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr, are also defendants.

Eric Trump was also in court for closing arguments.

Besides monetary damages, Ms James wants Mr Trump and his co-defendants barred from doing business in New York.

State lawyers say that by making himself seem richer, Mr Trump qualified for better loan terms from banks, saving him at least 168 million dollars (£132 million).

Mr Kise, praising Mr Trump as “part of the fabric of the commercial real estate industry” for half a century, pointed to Mr Trump’s evidence that he intended lenders to do their own research and vetting after receiving his financial statements.

The lawyer also argued, as Mr Trump has repeatedly, that the documents understated – rather than overvalued – his wealth.

Mr Kise, echoing Mr Trump’s evidence, said the outside accountants that helped prepare the statements should have flagged any discrepancies and that the documents came with disclaimers that shield him from liability.

Judge Engoron said he is deciding the case because neither side asked for a jury and state law does not allow for juries for this type of lawsuit.

He said he hopes to have a decision by the end of the month.

Last month, in a ruling denying a defence bid for an early verdict, the judge signalled he is inclined to find Mr Trump and his co-defendants liable on at least some claims.

“Valuations, as elucidated ad nauseum in this trial, can be based on different criteria analysed in different ways,” Judge Engoron wrote in the December 18 ruling.

“But a lie is still a lie.”