A federal appeals court has ruled that President Donald Trump does not need to pay an $83 million defamation award to writer E. Jean Carroll until the Supreme Court either reviews the case or decides not to take it up.
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York issued this order on Monday after Trump requested a pause on its earlier ruling that denied him the opportunity to challenge the defamation award before the full appeals court.
Advertisement
The court granted Trump’s request to pause the ruling, noting that there were no objections from Carroll, as long as Trump agreed to increase the bond by $7.46 million to cover the interest that will accumulate on her award during the anticipated legal proceedings, which are expected to reach the Supreme Court, reports said.
“We are pleased that the Second Circuit conditioned the stay on President Trump posting a bond of nearly $100 million,” Carroll’s attorney, Roberta Kaplan, told NBC News in a statement.
He cited Trump’s earlier increase, raising the total owed to over $91 million before Monday’s order.
Attorneys for Trump are attempting to invoke a federal law that would substitute the U.S. government in place of Trump as the defendant in the defamation lawsuit brought by E. Jean Carroll.
If successful, the move could effectively end Carroll’s case because the federal government generally cannot be sued for defamation under existing law.
A federal appeals court last month declined a request to rehear arguments related to that legal strategy.
A jury ruled in favor of Carroll in 2024, finding that Trump defamed her by repeatedly denying allegations that he sexually abused her in a department store dressing room during the 1990s.
Advertisement
Trump is now seeking Supreme Court review after previously asking the high court to consider his appeal in a separate $5 million defamation judgment that Carroll also won against him.
Supreme Court justices were scheduled to hold a private conference on Feb. 20 to consider a slate of petitions for review, including one filed by Trump, who asked the high court to review the 2023 verdict against him in a civil lawsuit brought by Carroll.
In the petition, Trump’s attorneys described Carroll’s allegations as “facially implausible” and “politically motivated.”
They argued the accusations were “propped up” by what they called a series of indefensible evidentiary rulings that allowed Carroll’s attorneys to introduce evidence the Trump team opposed.
“President Trump has clearly and consistently denied that this supposed incident ever occurred,” Trump’s attorneys wrote.
“No physical or DNA evidence corroborates Carroll’s story,” the filing continued.
Advertisement
“There were no eyewitnesses, no video evidence, and no police report or investigation,” the attorneys wrote.
They also noted that Carroll waited more than 20 years to accuse Trump, doing so after he became president.
Trump’s attorneys argued the timing allowed Carroll to “maximize political injury” to Trump and “profit for herself.”
The petition further suggested Carroll’s allegations mirror the plot of a “Law & Order” episode, which the attorneys noted is one of her favorite television shows.
Trump’s legal team also objected to the admission of testimony from Jessica Leeds and Natasha Stoynoff.
Leeds alleged that Trump assaulted her on an airplane in 1979. Stoynoff claimed Trump attacked her at Mar-a-Lago in 2005.
Advertisement
The attorneys argued that both accounts contain credibility issues and inconsistencies.
They also objected to the admission of the 2005 “Access Hollywood” recording in which Trump made lewd remarks.
Carroll, a journalist and advice columnist, sued Trump twice after publishing a book in 2019. In the book, Carroll claimed Trump raped her in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room in 1996.
Trump has repeatedly denied the allegations and has called the case “a complete con job.”
He has also said Carroll was “not my type.”
“I don’t know this woman, have no idea who she is,” Trump wrote on Truth Social in October 2022.
This article may contain commentary
which reflects the author’s opinion.
