The nation’s highest court on Monday declined former President Donald Trump’s bid to overturn a jury’s $5 million verdict that he defamed writer E. Jean Carroll. The decision leaves the judgment intact and signals that the Court is not inclined to entertain Trump’s request for a fresh review.
Background of the case
Carroll, a longtime advice columnist and former television talk‑show host, sued Trump for sexual abuse that she says occurred in a New York City department store in the mid‑1990s. At trial in 2023, a jury found Trump liable for both the alleged assault and for defamation after he publicly denied the allegation in 2022. The defamation component resulted in a $5 million award to Carroll.
Trump’s legal team filed a petition asking the Supreme Court to reconsider its earlier refusal to hear the appeal in June. The Court denied that petition along with several others, an action that is uncommon but not unprecedented.
Trump’s ongoing legal strategy
In addition to the $5 million judgment, Trump and the Justice Department are pursuing a separate appeal seeking to dismiss an $83 million verdict tied to statements he made about Carroll while serving as president in 2019. The administration argues that the president is immune from civil suits for comments made in the course of official duties. The Supreme Court has not yet ruled on that request.
After the June denial, Trump promptly paid the $5 million judgment, complying with the court’s order while continuing to contest the liability.
Legal and constitutional considerations
The Supreme Court’s refusal to take the case does not address the merits of Trump’s arguments; it simply leaves the lower‑court rulings in place. The decision underscores the Court’s limited willingness to intervene in cases that have already been decided by juries and lower courts, especially when the issues involve alleged defamation and claims of presidential immunity.
Legal scholars note that the case touches on First Amendment questions about the balance between free speech and protecting individuals from false statements, as well as the scope of presidential immunity under the Constitution.
Public reaction
The ruling has drawn reactions from both supporters and critics of the former president. Advocates for victims of sexual assault view the decision as a reaffirmation that powerful individuals can be held accountable. Trump’s supporters argue that the legal battles are politically motivated and that the president should be shielded from civil suits arising from official statements.
Regardless of the political divide, the Supreme Court’s action keeps the $5 million judgment in force and leaves the larger $83 million case unresolved, indicating that the legal saga surrounding Carroll’s claims will continue to play out in the courts.
Original reporting: KTBS 3 (Shreveport) — read the source article.
