Court Upholds Massive Defamation Award
In a significant legal setback for President Donald J. Trump, a federal appeals court has upheld an $83.3 million defamation judgment awarded to writer E. Jean Carroll. The decision, issued on September 8, confirms the jury's finding that Trump's statements denying Carroll's accusations of sexual assault in the mid-1990s and calling her a liar were defamatory. The ruling stems from a civil case where jurors determined that Trump's remarks severely damaged Carroll's reputation.
The Second United States Appeals Circuit rejected Trump's argument that a recent Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity should shield him from liability. The court's panel found no basis to overturn the verdict or to substitute the federal government as the defendant in the case. This marks another chapter in the ongoing legal battles between Trump and Carroll, who first accused him of assault in a 2019 article published in New York magazine.
History of Legal Battles Between Trump and Carroll
The legal saga between E. Jean Carroll and President Trump began with her public accusation of sexual assault at Bergdorf Goodman in New York City, alleged to have occurred in late 1995 or early 1996. Following her claims, Trump issued statements in 2019 denying the allegations and accusing Carroll of fabricating the story. These statements led to two separate defamation lawsuits, with the first resulting in a $5 million award to Carroll in 2023 for sexual abuse and defamation, a verdict also upheld by appeals courts earlier this year.
The $83.3 million award, decided by a jury in January 2024, specifically addressed additional defamatory remarks made by Trump. Despite efforts to appeal, including arguments about presidential immunity, the latest ruling solidifies the financial penalty. Trump's legal team has indicated plans to escalate the matter to the Supreme Court, signaling that this dispute is far from over.
Broader Implications and Next Steps
The upheld verdict has sparked discussions about the limits of presidential immunity and the accountability of public figures for their statements. Carroll's attorney argued that immunity does not extend to personal defamation cases, a stance the appeals court supported. This decision could set a precedent for how similar cases involving high-profile individuals are handled in the future.
As President Trump prepares to challenge the ruling at the Supreme Court, the case continues to draw significant public attention. Posts on X reflect a polarized sentiment, with some users expressing support for Carroll's victory and others questioning the fairness of the judgment. Meanwhile, Trump secured a bond for the $83.3 million plus an additional 10 percent to pursue his appeal, demonstrating his determination to contest the verdict at every level.