E. Jean Carroll Wins Rehearing Denial Over Trump Trial \ Newslooks \ Washington DC \ Mary Sidiqi \ Evening Edition \ A federal appeals court has denied Donald Trump’s request to revisit a $5 million verdict in a sexual abuse and defamation case brought by E. Jean Carroll. The 2nd Circuit Court upheld the previous jury’s decision. Trump maintains his innocence while a second appeal is pending.
Quick Looks
- The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Trump’s appeal in an 8-2 vote.
- Trump was found liable in 2023 for sexually abusing and defaming E. Jean Carroll.
- The case centers around an alleged 1996 assault in a Manhattan department store.
- Trump’s legal team claimed biased evidentiary rulings; the court disagreed.
- Dissenting judges criticized the trial’s evidentiary approach.
- Four concurring judges, all Biden appointees, dismissed Trump’s legal reasoning.
- A second trial awarded Carroll $83.3 million for defamation in 2024.
- Trump did not attend the original trial, offering limited testimony later.
- Further appeals in the defamation case are scheduled for June 24.
Deep Look
In a decisive 8-2 vote, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals declined to reconsider a $5 million civil verdict against former President Donald Trump in a high-profile case involving allegations of sexual abuse and defamation. This latest ruling upholds a jury’s 2023 decision that found Trump responsible for sexually abusing advice columnist E. Jean Carroll in a Manhattan department store in the 1990s and for defaming her decades later.
The appeals court’s decision followed Trump’s attempt to bring his case before the full appellate bench, arguing that critical errors in trial procedure—particularly the inclusion of testimony from other accusers—had unfairly swayed the jury. The court, however, saw no basis for reexamination.
Carroll’s claims surfaced publicly in 2019 with the publication of her memoir, in which she recounted a disturbing incident from spring 1996. According to her testimony, what began as a lighthearted encounter with Trump in the luxury department store Bergdorf Goodman escalated into a violent assault inside a dressing room. Carroll alleged that Trump forced himself on her, a charge he has vehemently denied both in court and publicly.
Trump’s legal team argued that trial Judge Lewis A. Kaplan’s decisions, particularly allowing two additional women to testify about similar alleged misconduct by Trump, unfairly prejudiced the jury. One of the women claimed Trump assaulted her on a plane in the late 1970s, and another alleged misconduct in 2005. Trump denied all three allegations and opted not to attend the 2023 trial.
In December, a three-judge panel from the same appellate court upheld the initial jury verdict. The panel concluded that the trial had been conducted properly, with no substantial legal errors justifying a reversal or rehearing. On Friday, the broader appellate court reinforced that decision.
Writing for the majority, four judges—Myrna Pérez, Eunice C. Lee, Beth Robinson, and Sarah A.L. Merriam—emphasized that the request to rehear the case did not meet the standard for reconsideration. “Simply re-litigating a case is not an appropriate use” of the appeals process, they stated, noting that such actions are reserved for questions of “exceptional importance” or when a clear legal conflict exists.
These four judges were all appointed by President Joe Biden, highlighting a political dimension to the case, particularly in contrast to the two dissenting judges—Steven J. Menashi and Michael H. Park—who were appointed by Trump. In their dissent, Menashi and Park sharply criticized the trial’s conduct, labeling it “a series of indefensible evidentiary rulings.” They argued that the jury relied on “impermissible character evidence” rather than reliable facts, undermining confidence in the verdict’s legitimacy.
Despite Trump’s continuous legal maneuvering, Carroll’s attorney, Roberta Kaplan, welcomed the ruling. “E. Jean Carroll is very pleased with today’s decision,” she stated, noting that both a civil jury and now an appellate court have supported Carroll’s claims. Kaplan, who is not related to Judge Lewis Kaplan, emphasized that Trump remains legally liable for both sexual assault and defamation.
Trump, who has consistently denied knowing Carroll or ever assaulting her, avoided participation in the initial trial. He did, however, provide brief testimony during a second trial in early 2024, which centered on defamation claims tied to his public denial of the allegations after Carroll’s memoir was released. That trial concluded with another significant judgment against Trump—an $83.3 million damages award.
Judge Kaplan presided over both proceedings. In the second trial, he instructed jurors to accept the findings of the first trial as legally binding. This strategy limited the scope of what Trump could challenge during the follow-up proceedings, a point of contention for his legal team.
Trump’s appeal related to the $83.3 million defamation verdict is still pending, with oral arguments scheduled for June 24. This leaves the door open for further developments, though legal experts say overturning the verdicts will be difficult given the strength of the original rulings and appellate support.
Carroll’s case represents a rare legal victory for a sexual assault survivor against a prominent public figure, especially one as politically powerful as a former president. It also highlights the challenges survivors face in pursuing justice many years after alleged incidents occur. While Trump has not been criminally charged in connection with Carroll’s claims, the civil judgments carry significant reputational and financial consequences.
As Trump prepares for the 2024 presidential election, these legal setbacks underscore the mounting legal pressure surrounding him—ranging from civil judgments like Carroll’s case to ongoing criminal investigations and indictments across various jurisdictions.
E. Jean Carroll E. Jean Carroll E. Jean Carroll
You must Register or Login to post a comment.