Carroll urges supreme court to reject Trump challenge to $83m verdict

E Jean Carroll’s legal team has urged the US supreme court to turn away Donald Trump’s challenge to an $83m damages award, arguing that the justices have no reason to rescue him from the consequences of his litigation decisions. Their opposition, filed on 30 October, contests his request for the court to hear an appeal.

A jury awarded Carroll the damages on 26 January 2024. That decision came less than a year after the journalist and author secured a separate $5m verdict in a case involving sexual abuse and defamation. Trump has consistently denied wrongdoing in connection with Carroll and is now seeking to overturn the larger award.

Trump’s appeal arguments include a claim that presidential immunity shields him from liability for conduct while he was in office. The conduct at issue includes statements he made in 2019 calling Carroll a liar. His lawyers argue that the prospect of a sitting president facing nearly $100m in personal liability for actions they describe as within his federal duties warrants the supreme court’s attention.

His legal team has also framed the appeal as a matter affecting the presidency as an institution. They contend that exposing presidents to personal liability for official conduct, particularly damages large enough to bankrupt virtually any other president, could discourage future occupants of the office from exercising executive power.

Carroll’s lawyers, led by Roberta Kaplan, counter that lower courts have repeatedly upheld the verdict. They note that the second trial determined damages after the first jury found that Trump had sexually abused and defamed Carroll, a former Elle columnist. In their filing, they described seven years of litigation involving five appeals, eight requests for stays and six days of trial.

The filing also described the abuse Carroll faced after Trump’s defamatory statements. Her lawyers said she was subjected to attacks on Twitter and Facebook and through email, including threats of physical violence, sexual violence and death. They argued that Trump’s repeated accusations and the thousands of threats from his followers formed part of the ordeal she endured while pursuing the case.

The dispute began with Carroll’s allegation that Trump attacked her decades earlier in a Manhattan department store dressing room. Her account became public in June 2019 through a New York magazine excerpt from her forthcoming book, What Do We Need Men For? A Modest Proposal. In September, Trump agreed to end his challenge to the first jury verdict after the supreme court again declined to hear his appeal.

Responding to the latest filing, a spokesman for Trump’s legal team portrayed the Carroll litigation as politically motivated and funded by Democrats. The spokesman said Trump would continue fighting what his team called “Liberal Lawfare” while pursuing his presidential agenda.