Donald Trump was selling Republican voters a simple argument in 2016.

He was a successful businessman.

He knew how to make deals.

He understood money.

And unlike the politicians running against him, Trump said his experience in the private sector had prepared him to fix a government that didn't know how to get things done.

But while Trump was campaigning on his business reputation, a very different story about the Trump brand was making its way through the courts.

It involved something called Trump University.

And former customers were accusing the organization of selling them an expensive dream that never lived up to what they believed they had been promised.

This Wasn't a University

Despite its name, Trump University wasn't an accredited university.

It didn't award college degrees.

Instead, the company sold seminars and educational programs that promised to teach customers about real-estate investing and Trump's business methods.

The Trump name was central to the marketing.

Advertisements featured his photograph and signature, and New York court records would later describe Trump as personally involved in the company's founding, overall business strategy and advertising.

That association mattered.

Customers weren't simply buying a real-estate seminar.

They were buying access to the business knowledge represented by one of the most famous names in American real estate.

From Free Seminar to Expensive Programs

The sales process could begin inexpensively — sometimes with a free introductory seminar.

But customers could then be encouraged to purchase increasingly expensive programs.

One of the best-known offerings was an approximately $35,000 mentorship package.

Former students alleged that aggressive sales techniques were used to persuade customers to spend thousands or tens of thousands of dollars.

The lawsuits also challenged representations surrounding instructors and mentors and the extent to which Trump himself had selected or approved the people teaching students.

For customers who had enrolled because they believed they were receiving access to Trump's personal methods and expertise, those allegations went directly to the value of what they believed they were buying.

New York Takes Trump to Court

In 2013, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman filed a civil case against Trump and the organization.

The state alleged fraudulent and deceptive practices in the marketing and operation of Trump University.

Among the issues was the use of the word “University.”

The organization wasn't chartered as a university by New York's education authorities.

Trump University eventually changed its name to the Trump Entrepreneur Initiative.

But changing the name didn't end the legal problems.

Former students were also pursuing class-action litigation in California.

By the time Trump was running for president, the controversy that had begun years earlier was becoming national political news.

An Awkward Problem for Candidate Trump

This wasn't just another lawsuit involving a wealthy businessman.

It struck directly at Trump's political identity.

Trump wasn't running for president based on a record as a governor or senator.

He didn't have one.

His résumé was his business career.

The buildings.

The deals.

The Trump name.

The Apprentice.

His argument was essentially that business success demonstrated the skills necessary to run the country.

Trump University gave his opponents an obvious response:

What exactly had Trump's business brand been selling?

The lawsuits allowed former customers to tell a story very different from the image Trump presented at his rallies.

Instead of Trump the master negotiator, they described an organization that they alleged had used Trump's celebrity and reputation to sell costly programs that didn't deliver what they expected.

Trump vigorously rejected that characterization.

Trump Fights Back

Trump maintained that Trump University had helped many students and pointed to favorable evaluations from participants.

He denied allegations that the program was fraudulent and attacked the litigation against him.

Trump's attorneys likewise argued that customers had received valuable instruction and that the organization had substantial evidence of student satisfaction.

There was therefore an important distinction during the campaign:

These were allegations being litigated in court.

Trump had not been found guilty of a crime involving Trump University, and the civil cases had not yet reached their ultimate resolution.

But the controversy wasn't disappearing.

In fact, it was about to become considerably more damaging politically.

Trump Turns His Attention to the Judge

One of the federal cases was being handled by U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel.

As the litigation continued during the presidential campaign, Trump began publicly attacking Curiel.

Trump argued that the judge was treating him unfairly.

Then Trump focused on Curiel's heritage.

Curiel was born in Indiana.

He was an American citizen.

His parents were immigrants from Mexico.

Trump nevertheless argued that Curiel's Mexican heritage created a conflict because Trump was campaigning to build a wall along the Mexican border.

The comments produced criticism from members of Trump's own party.

The controversy had now moved far beyond the merits of Trump University itself.

A presidential candidate was publicly attacking the judge overseeing litigation involving his business while invoking the judge's ancestry as a reason to question his impartiality.

The Lawsuits Didn't Go Away

Trump won the presidential election in November 2016.

Ten days later, the Trump University litigation moved toward settlement.

Trump agreed to pay $25 million to resolve the cases.

The settlement did not require Trump to admit wrongdoing.

The money was used primarily to compensate former students who had participated in the lawsuits.

Years later, New York court records would continue referencing the Trump University matter and the $25 million settlement.

The Businessman Candidate Meets His Business Record

Trump University mattered during the 2016 campaign for a reason larger than the lawsuit itself.

Donald Trump had asked Americans to judge him by his business career.

That inevitably meant examining the less flattering parts of that career too.

Trump presented his name as evidence of success.

Trump University demonstrated that the same name could also bring lawsuits, dissatisfied customers and allegations of deceptive business practices.

And as Trump moved closer to the Republican presidential nomination, a controversy that had begun in seminar rooms and court filings became something much larger.

It became part of the country's examination of the businessman who wanted to become president.