The US Supreme Court has once again declined to hear the appeal filed by Donald Trump regarding the sexual assault and defamation case brought against him by writer E. Jean Carroll. The decision arrives only weeks after the court initially refused to review the $5 million jury verdict awarded to Carroll. This outcome follows the collection of the damages by Carroll last month, marking three years since the original verdict was delivered in 2023.
The origin of the case lies in statements made by Trump in 2022 concerning Carroll. His petition challenged the trial’s legitimacy, arguing that it was “propped up by a series of indefensible evidentiary rulings.” Specifically, Trump took issue with the admission of testimonies from other alleged victims of his assaults. He contended that the judgment should be reexamined in light of what he considered inadmissible evidence, according to federal evidence rules.
The US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit previously found that such testimonies were admissible, invoking federal evidence rules 413 and 415, which allow for consideration of other sexual assaults by the defendant. The Supreme Court’s denial did not elaborate on the reasoning provided by the lower court. More details are available here.
This denial coincides with another petition from Trump concerning a separate defamation case by Carroll, in which she was awarded $83.3 million by a jury in 2024. This related case centers around comments Trump made in 2019 during his presidency. He claims those remarks were “official Presidential acts” and should not be used to establish liability, citing a precedent that shields presidents from prosecution for their official duties.
The Supreme Court is expected to announce in early September whether it will hear Trump’s concurrent appeal regarding the 2019 statements. The broader legal landscape surrounding these cases underscores ongoing debates about presidential immunity and the complexities of evidence rules in civil litigation.