President Donald Trump has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn a $83.3 million defamation judgment awarded to writer E. Jean Carroll, who accused him of sexual assault and defamation. According to multiple reports, both Trump's personal lawyers and representatives from the Department of Justice have filed separate petitions seeking this outcome.
Key Takeaways
Donald Trump has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn an $83.3 million defamation judgment he was ordered to pay writer E. Jean Carroll, who accused him of sexual assault and defamation.
- Trump's legal team argues that his statements about Carroll were made as part of his official duties as president and should be protected by presidential immunity.
- The Justice Department has also filed a petition seeking the same outcome, citing the Westfall Act which shields federal employees from certain civil lawsuits.
- This is the second time Trump has asked the Supreme Court to overturn a defamation verdict against Carroll. In June, the court declined to hear his appeal of an earlier $5 million judgment.
- The case centers on comments Trump made during his first term as president after Carroll accused him of sexually assaulting her in the 1990s.
⚖
▼Source Claims Check
1 Difference FoundAll 7 publishers report consistent facts across 3 key claims. 1 point of difference noted.
| Claim | Status | Reason | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Presidential Immunity Argument | 1 Difference | Majority reports Trump argues for immunity; UPI notes it doesn't apply to civil cases | ▼ |
| Verdict Amount | Broad Agreement | $83.3 million defamation verdict against Trump | |
| Previous Verdict | Broad Agreement | $5 million judgment in a separate case | |
| Westfall Act Argument | Broad Agreement | DOJ invokes Westfall Act to shield Trump from liability |
Presidential Immunity Argument
▼Majority reports Trump argues for immunity; UPI notes it doesn't apply to civil cases
Verdict Amount
Broad Agreement$83.3 million defamation verdict against Trump
Previous Verdict
Broad Agreement$5 million judgment in a separate case
Westfall Act Argument
Broad AgreementDOJ invokes Westfall Act to shield Trump from liability
This analysis is AI-generated and may not perfectly represent each source's reporting. Always read the original articles for full context.
The case centers on comments Trump made during his first term as president after Carroll accused him of sexually assaulting her in a Bergdorf Goodman department store dressing room in the mid-1990s. The $83.3 million verdict, which includes punitive damages, was upheld by the 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals earlier this year.
Trump's legal team argues that his statements about Carroll were made as part of his official duties as president and should be protected by presidential immunity. They point to a 2024 Supreme Court ruling that expanded the concept of presidential immunity to include anything considered an 'official act' of the presidency, although this precedent only applies to criminal prosecution.
The Justice Department's petition echoes another argument made by Trump's team: that the DOJ should have been allowed to substitute the U.S. government for Trump as the defendant in the lawsuit because he was president at the time he made the statements about Carroll. If granted, this would likely result in a dismissal of the case under the Westfall Act, which shields federal employees from certain civil claims for conduct performed in the course of their duties.
This is not Trump's first attempt to overturn a defamation verdict against Carroll. In June, the Supreme Court declined to hear his appeal of an earlier $5 million judgment awarded to Carroll in a separate but related case. Despite this setback, Trump has continued to deny any wrongdoing and maintain that he never met Carroll.
How this summary was created
This summary synthesizes reporting from 7 independent publishers using AI. All sources are cited and linked below. NewsBalance is a news aggregator and media literacy tool, not a news publisher. AI-generated content may contain errors or inaccuracies — always verify important information with the original sources.