The United States Supreme Court has rejected U.S. President Donald Trump’s appeal for a second time regarding a $5 million US verdict in favor of E. Jean Carroll. The jury found Trump liable for sexually abusing and defaming Carroll, a former magazine columnist. Trump had requested the court to reconsider their previous decision in June, which denied his appeal of the 2023 jury verdict related to allegations of rape in a Manhattan department store dressing room in the 1990s. Trump’s lawyers argued that the trial was unfair.
The Supreme Court’s order, which was unsigned and provided no explanation, is a rare occurrence, as the Court seldom grants requests for reconsideration. Additionally, the justices are reviewing another appeal from Trump concerning an $83.3 million US jury verdict for defaming Carroll in 2019 during his first term as president.
Trump’s legal team claims that presidential immunity protects him from Carroll’s allegations and asserts that lower courts incorrectly ruled that he had waived that defense. The legal battle between Trump and Carroll began in 2019 when Carroll accused Trump of raping her in a department store dressing room. Trump has consistently denied these claims, calling them lies.
The $5 million US verdict stemmed from Trump’s statements in 2022, where he labeled Carroll’s claims as a “hoax” and a “con job” on social media. The jury in that case concluded in 2023 that Trump had sexually abused and defamed Carroll but did not find evidence to support Carroll’s claim of rape.
After the Supreme Court’s denial of Trump’s appeal in June, Carroll received nearly $5.63 million US from Trump, including the original civil verdict amount plus interest. In a request for a rehearing, Trump’s legal team highlighted the issue of presidential immunity, suggesting that it could impact both the 2023 verdict and the $83.3 million US verdict from 2024 if the justices decide to take up the latter case. It’s important to note that the Supreme Court’s 2024 decision established full immunity for former presidents from criminal prosecution for actions conducted within their constitutional powers during their term in office, while the Carroll cases are civil lawsuits.
