The U.S. Supreme Court has rejected President Donald Trump’s request to reconsider his challenge to a civil judgment determining he was liable for sexually abusing and defaming advice columnist E. Jean Carroll. The court announced its decision through an unsigned order issued without comment or noted dissents, marking the second time in recent months that the high court has turned away the case. Rehearings of this nature are exceptionally rare, with the justices seldom granting petitions for reconsideration since the mid-1960s.

The legal dispute originates from an incident in the 1990s inside a Manhattan department store changing room. In May 2023, a federal jury in New York found Trump liable for sexual abuse and for subsequently defaming Carroll in a social media statement where he called her accusations “a Hoax and a lie” and said “This woman is not my type!” While the jury determined the evidence did not meet the specific statutory definition for rape in effect at the time, jurors unanimously concluded he was liable for sexual assault.

Following the Supreme Court’s ruling, legal representatives for the plaintiff emphasized that the judicial process for this specific claim has drawn to a complete close. Attorney Roberta Kaplan stated, “As a result, the jury’s unanimous verdict that Donald Trump sexually assaulted and then defamed E. Jean Carroll is now final and cannot be challenged in any court.” Former advice columnist Carroll had already received $5.62 million earlier this summer, a total reflecting the initial $5 million judgment alongside accrued interest.

Trump has consistently denied all allegations, maintaining that he had no prior knowledge of Carroll and describing the civil proceedings as politically motivated. His defense team has previously criticized the trial as fundamentally unfair, continuing to characterize the claims as “facially implausible”. Spokespersons for the defense continue to express public confidence in their broader legal stance, maintaining that the accusations remain part of a partisan effort.

While this particular judgment is concluded, the high court is still weighing a separate appeal involving the same parties. That case involves an $83.3 million defamation verdict stemming from remarks made while Trump served his first presidential term in 2019. In that pending matter, defense attorneys argue that presidential immunity shields official statements made while in office, a distinct legal argument that the Supreme Court has not yet resolved. Sources:

Editorial credit: lev radin / Shutterstock.com