President Donald Trump lost his latest attempt to overturn a civil jury verdict that found him liable for sexually abusing writer E. Jean Carroll in the mid-1990s and defaming her decades later when she made her claims public.
A majority of judges on the 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in New York declined Trump’s request for the court’s full bench to rehear his appeal of the verdict. This ruling involves one of two defamation-related cases Carroll has won against Trump.
This decision comes six months after a three-judge panel on the 2nd Circuit upheld a 2023 Manhattan federal jury’s verdict ordering Trump to pay Carroll $5 million in damages.
Two judges appointed to the 2nd Circuit by Trump dissented from Friday’s decision not to grant an en banc rehearing.
Possible Next Steps
Trump’s legal team may now petition the Supreme Court to review the case, though the high court is not required to hear it.
A spokesman for Trump’s team referred to the case as the “Democrat-funded Carroll Hoax” and stated that “President Trump will keep winning against Liberal Lawfare” while focusing on his political goals.
Carroll’s attorney, Roberta Kaplan, expressed satisfaction with the decision, emphasizing that Trump remains liable for sexual assault and defamation despite continued legal maneuvers.
The lawsuits relate to Carroll’s allegation that Trump sexually assaulted her in a Manhattan department store dressing room in the 1990s, followed by his defamatory statements denying the claim after it became public in 2019.
Details on Carroll’s Lawsuits
Carroll’s initial defamation suit, related to comments Trump made in 2019, resulted in a January 2024 verdict awarding her $83.3 million.
The 2nd Circuit panel is set to hear oral arguments on June 24 in Trump’s appeal of that verdict.
Recently, the court rejected Trump’s request to delay those arguments pending a decision on whether Trump can be replaced as defendant due to his presidential status.
In 2022, Carroll filed a second lawsuit for battery and defamation, after New York passed a law allowing claims for sexual assault beyond usual statutes of limitations.
This second case was the subject of Friday’s decision and includes allegations about the 1990s incident and Trump’s 2022 statements.
Judges’ Dissent and Legal Debate
Judge Steven Menashi, who dissented with Judge Michael Park, argued the three-judge panel sanctioned “striking departures” from precedent to uphold the verdict.
Menashi criticized the trial judge, Lewis Kaplan, for excluding key evidence, which he said unfairly favored Carroll’s case. He also disputed the acceptance of “stale witness testimony” from Jessica Leeds, who alleged inappropriate conduct by Trump decades earlier.
Four other 2nd Circuit judges responded, stating that an en banc rehearing is generally reserved for questions of exceptional importance or conflicting precedents.
They argued the dissent ignored established restraint in appellate review and emphasized that the criteria for a full court rehearing were not met.
Judges Denny Chin and Susan Carney, who were part of the panel rejecting Trump’s appeal, wrote a separate statement affirming their view that no error justified retrial or full court review.
What The Author Thinks
The refusal of the appeals court to reconsider the verdict sends a clear message that the judiciary is committed to upholding accountability, even when cases involve powerful political figures. Despite ongoing attempts to challenge the rulings, the courts appear focused on the evidence and legal standards rather than political influence. The dissenting opinions highlight that debates over procedure and evidence will continue, but the core verdicts stand firm. This case illustrates the delicate balance between legal scrutiny and ensuring victims receive justice.
Featured image credit: The Nation
For more stories like it, click the +Follow button at the top of this page to follow us.