President Donald Trump and the Department of Justice asked the Supreme Court on Tuesday to overturn an $83.3 million civil verdict that compensates writer E. Jean Carroll for defamation after she publicly accused him of sexual assault. The move comes 2 years after a Manhattan federal court jury found Trump civilly liable for defaming Carroll in 2019 when she went public with her claim that he had raped her in a Bergdorf Goodman department store dressing room in the 1990s.
Trump's attorneys argue he has immunity from the defamation claim because he made the comments about Carroll in 2019, when he was president. They're relying on a 2024 Supreme Court ruling that granted presidents immunity for official acts, claiming that "most of a President's public communications" qualify as official conduct. In their filing, Trump's lawyers said, "Here, the President of the United States has been ordered to pay nearly $100 million in damages — including post-judgment interest — for issuing a press release and answering reporters' questions, from the White House, defending against attacks on his fitness for office."
Justice Department Joins the Appeal
The Justice Department's petition echoes Trump's argument and says the department should have been allowed to substitute the U.S. government for Trump as the defendant because he was president when he made the statements about Carroll. Under the Westfall Act, federal employees are shielded from certain civil claims for conduct performed in the course of their duties, including defamation. If that switch had been allowed, the case would've been dismissed. That would effectively put federal taxpayers on the hook for Trump's conduct, though in this case it would almost certainly mean the end of Carroll's defamation case.
The appeals court judge who sided with Carroll rejected Trump's immunity claims, noting he'd raised them far too late. US Circuit Judge Denny Chin, who was nominated to the bench by President Barack Obama, wrote, "Presidential immunity was not raised for the first three years of this case." Chin also resisted Trump's effort to have the United States substituted as a defendant, writing that "no other defendant would be permitted to move to substitute the United States in his place, fifteen months after trial and the entry of judgment against him."
Pattern of Defamation and Threats
Carroll claims Trump defamed her when, in 2019, he denied the assault, said she wasn't his type, and claimed she made it up to boost sales of a book. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the $83.3 million verdict in September, calling the judgment reasonable "in light of the extraordinary and egregious facts of this case." The appeals court wrote that the record supported the district court's determination that the "degree of reprehensibility" of Trump's conduct was "remarkably high, perhaps unprecedented." Trump's repeated comments about Carroll resulted in "a multitude of death threats and other threats of physical injury," and the jury was allowed to find Trump wouldn't stop defaming Carroll unless he was hit with a substantial financial penalty.
The two petitions came a month after the Supreme Court rejected Trump's request that it hear his appeal of a $5 million verdict in favor of Carroll in a separate but related civil case. Carroll received that money, plus more than $600,000 in interest, from a court fund where Trump had deposited funds to secure the verdict. In that earlier case, a Manhattan federal court jury in May 2023 found that Trump was liable for having sexually abused Carroll in the dressing room of the Bergdorf Goodman department store in the 1990s and for defaming her in late 2022 when he made statements denying her allegations.
Long Legal Battle Continues
Both cases are part of a legal battle between Trump and Carroll that dates back to 2019 and includes two civil trials. Carroll said in 2019 that Trump sexually assaulted her at a New York City department store in 1996, and Trump responded with allegations that she was making up the story to sell her book. Carroll sued him months later and eventually won the $83.3 million judgment for damages. As the case was ongoing, Trump repeated the denial in a 2022 social media post. Carroll then sued Trump again under a special window of time that New York granted to sexual abuse survivors, and in 2023, a New York jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse against Carroll, resulting in the $5 million verdict.
Because the Supreme Court isn't in session over the summer, it won't consider the president's appeal until the fall. If it agrees to hear the case, it wouldn't likely hand down a decision until next June. The appeal has not yet been docketed at the high court. Attorneys for Carroll declined to comment on the latest filing.
In the appeal he filed last year in the case involving the $5 million verdict, Trump told the Supreme Court, "There were no eyewitnesses, no video evidence, and no police report or investigation." He also said, "Instead, Carroll waited more than 20 years to falsely accuse Donald Trump, who she politically opposes, until after he became the 45th president, when she could maximize political injury to him and profit for herself." Trump has made a long-shot request for the high court to reconsider its decision to reject his appeal of the $5 million verdict, but a federal judge ordered the release of the money to Carroll.
Trump's lawyers told the court, "This is the first case in our Nation's history in which a court has imposed damages liability on a President for his conduct in office." They argued in their petition on Tuesday that the 2nd Circuit "wrongly held that President Trump had somehow forfeited the defense of Presidential immunity solely because his first responsive pleading did not invoke Presidential immunity by name, even though President Trump repeatedly invoked that immunity, including in his answer to the amended complaint and his motion for summary judgment."
Why This Matters:
The Supreme Court's decision on whether to hear this appeal will determine whether sexual assault survivors can hold powerful officials accountable through civil courts when they defame their accusers. If the court accepts Trump's immunity argument, it could create a sweeping shield for sitting presidents who use their office to attack and discredit those who accuse them of wrongdoing, effectively placing the power of the presidency above the rights of victims seeking justice. The appeals court found that Trump's repeated defamatory statements resulted in death threats and other threats of physical injury against Carroll, underscoring the real-world harm that can flow from a president's words. The Justice Department's attempt to substitute the federal government as defendant would shift the financial burden of Trump's conduct to taxpayers while ending Carroll's case entirely. Federal appeals courts have already twice upheld jury verdicts finding Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation, with judges noting the "extraordinary and egregious facts" and finding Trump's conduct "remarkably high, perhaps unprecedented" in its reprehensibility. The outcome will shape whether civil accountability exists for presidents who allegedly abuse their platform to harm those who challenge them.