Trump plans to ask Supreme Court to toss E. Jean Carroll's $5 million abuse and defamation verdict
Source: AP
Updated 3:41 PM EDT, September 3, 2025
NEW YORK (AP) President Donald Trump will soon ask the Supreme Court to throw out a jurys finding in a civil lawsuit that he sexually abused writer E. Jean Carroll at a Manhattan department store in the mid-1990s and later defamed her, his lawyers said in a recent court filing.
Trumps lawyers previewed the move as they asked the high court to extend its deadline for challenging the $5 million verdict from Sept. 10 to Nov. 11. The president intends to seek review of significant issues arising from the trial and the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals subsequent decisions upholding the verdict, his lawyers said.
Carrolls lawyer, Roberta Kaplan, said Wednesday: We do not believe that President Trump will be able to present any legal issues in the Carroll cases that merit review by the United States Supreme Court.
Carroll testified at a 2023 trial that Trump turned a friendly encounter in spring 1996 into a violent attack in the dressing room at Bergdorf Goodman, a luxury retailer across the street from Trump Tower. The jury also found Trump liable for defaming Carroll when he made comments in October 2022 denying her allegation.
Read more: https://apnews.com/article/trump-carroll-abuse-defamation-supreme-court-3f2e5b92ba4f78cf70d9868b49901fce

riversedge
(77,782 posts)a reason.
GreenWave
(11,606 posts)SomewhereInTheMiddle
(568 posts)His rubber stamp, get-out-of-jail-free card?
That is so wrong.
What's worse is they seem to be allowing it, maybe even buying into it.
Thanks Justice Roberts. He'll remember this ... until he doesn't.
MyOwnPeace
(17,380 posts)Mitch McTurtles part in any and all of this.
Could/should be near the top of the list on Americas Hall-of-Shame of public servants (crooks/liars!).
Rhiannon12866
(242,930 posts)Is he going to try to fire or revoke the citizenship of New York AG Letitia James??
John1956PA
(4,463 posts)Orrex
(66,026 posts)Irish_Dem
(74,825 posts)Past, present, future.
Get out of jail free card for life.
lastlib
(26,703 posts)When they gets bought, they stays bought. I fear the outcome is pre-determined.
mdbl
(7,362 posts)They have no shame, nor do they care about their optics. Their justice is no longer blind but now only sees green.
lastlib
(26,703 posts)Whover has the gold makes the rules.
Shame? They don't need no stinkin' shame.
electric_blue68
(23,874 posts)😔
Irish_Dem
(74,825 posts)And to send many Americans to poverty and death.
GD traitors.
CozyMystery
(683 posts)to me that the Supremes have turned out to be corruptible and corrupted.
I don't know why I was so naive. I watched Clarence Thomas's confirmation hearings. I believed Anita Hill (that has not changed). But I also thought the Supreme Court had a lot more integrity than they do, even when I disagreed with their decisions.
It would take a lot of persuasion to make me think that some of the Court's justices (past and present) were corrupt. RBG, for example, I will always believe was incorruptible. I don't believe the Democrats on the Court are corruptible, at least not without a lot of proof.
To have so many justices, though, who make inconceivable decisions, just floors me.
I paid microscopic attention to the events of the Trump years the first time around. Now, even if I just read headlines, I am not shocked any more, but appalled. I can't believe I would say this, but I am glad my daughter moved to France a couple of weeks ago. It had nothing to do with Trump. Now my worry is that she won't move back her after her year at a university there ... this time because of what has happened to the country because of Trump.
More importantly, I am worried about what is happening to the country with that despicable creature in charge.
lonely bird
(2,538 posts)Pay it now.
edhopper
(36,643 posts)there are no Constitutional grounds for the Supremes to even look at this case.
Not that that will stop them.
LeftInTX
(33,932 posts)but SCOTUS isn't ab appeals court, there has to be a Constitutional or Rights issue.
How were Trumps Rights violated?
LeftInTX
(33,932 posts)sakabatou
(45,296 posts)turbinetree
(26,548 posts)lock him up..............
JohnnyRingo
(20,162 posts)It's a big ask and would be a big personal favor.
If the 5 wing nuts on the court comply with this it will prove it's about the man and not the office. They will approve anything he wants.
Old Crank
(6,220 posts)That seems to be their core. Looks like even a large group of GOP house women think it is a okay to rape and assault.
Captain Zero
(8,407 posts)2 votes there.
Dave Bowman
(5,830 posts)LetMyPeopleVote
(169,809 posts)Lawyers representing the president want until Nov. 10 to file their petition challenging a lower court ruling in Carrolls favor.
Trump wants to file a Supreme Court petition in E. Jean Carroll case this fall - MSNBC
— (@oc88.bsky.social) 2025-09-03T21:56:06.305Z
apple.news/Ajr3BoZimQdW...
https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/e-jean-carroll-trump-appeal-supreme-court-rcna228869
The latter case is the subject of Trumps forthcoming Supreme Court petition, which will challenge an appeals court ruling against him. In an Aug. 27 filing, his lawyers asked for permission to extend their filing deadline from Sept. 11 to Nov. 10.
Extensions are normal in Supreme Court practice, and in the likely event that this one is granted, that wouldnt signal that the court will necessarily agree to hear Trumps appeal. Its more of an administrative request simply to give his lawyers more time to file the petition. After they do, Carrolls lawyers can file a brief opposing review, and then the court will decide whether to take it up. It takes four justices to agree to grant review.
President Trump has consistently and unequivocally denied Carrolls allegations in both cases, his filing said. It didnt fully lay out his forthcoming legal arguments (those will come in the petition), but it said his lawyers intend to raise issues involving how different courts of appeals address evidentiary issues. Parties seeking high court review often tell the justices that review is needed to resolve splits among lower courts around the country.
trump got his butt kicked in the trial court and there are jury findings that will be hard to overcome.
FakeNoose
(38,638 posts)The crime was committed before Chump was elected President.
He had no "presidential immunity" - whatever that is - because he wasn't elected president yet. Even if he had been president, which he wasn't, he wasn't acting in his capacity as president when he raped and later defamed E. Jean Carroll. He's been rule against in a civil trial, and it has been upheld in every appeal since the original ruling.
He owes E. Jean Carroll, and he WILL PAY her! Enough already. Just shut up and pay her.
electric_blue68
(23,874 posts)😄 Sooo true a wish!
BoRaGard
(7,538 posts)
neohippie
(1,249 posts)is there a legal basis for Trump to appeal this civil trial verdict was the verdict issued longer than 90 days ago?
Can you appeal civil cases to the Supreme Court?
In all civil cases, petitions for writs of certiorari in cases to be taken to the Supreme Court from courts of appeals or from state courts must be filed within 90 days after the entry of judgment. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1254, 1257, and 2101(c).
republianmushroom
(21,375 posts)Owens
(561 posts)TexasBushwhacker
(21,002 posts)what's $5 Million? All his delays just cost more in legal fees and interest, not to mention, continuing to call attention to the case. Anyone with a lick of sense wouldn't let his ego get in the way of putting this thing to bed. But it's Trump ....
LeftInTX
(33,932 posts)Snackshack
(2,567 posts)... and DJT knows exactly how corrupt. cj roberts will make sure djt gets what he wants.
maga was not able to get 3 justices on the court in 1 presidential term w/o bending or breaking many rules / precedents that cj roberts allowed... don't forget roberts did not even show up to djt 2nd impeachment for treason and we all saw djt give his heartfelt thanks to roberts on national tv for immunity.
North Coast Lawyer
(186 posts)Unless the SCOTUS has become fully captured by Trump there isn't any issue worthy of Supreme Court review here. There was a verdict in a case that if the defendant wasn't Trump would have been pretty ordinary. The verdict was appealed and upheld. Ordinarily SCOTUS wouldn't touch such a pedestrian case.
HarryM
(427 posts)The Supremes should just ignore this as it was a State case, brought BEFORE Donny was appointed president.
Damn them to Hades if they do otherwise.
Response to BumRushDaShow (Original post)
Snackshack This message was self-deleted by its author.
RobinA
(10,419 posts)does the Supreme Court "throw out" jury findings? What country is this?
NNadir
(36,589 posts)...declared the US Constitution unconstitutional.
Captain Zero
(8,407 posts)Yet they are on the SC.
electric_blue68
(23,874 posts)The 5 Supremes better not mess with this.
Evolve Dammit
(21,217 posts)Paladin
(31,604 posts)If trump had a single decent human instinct, he'd let E. Jean Carroll have that $5 million, without further challenges; she damn sure earned it. He'd never miss it, given the open-and-obvious way he's monetizing his second term---with plenty of cash deals available to his dim sons and assorted ass-kissers, as well. But of course, it won't happen.
bmichaelh
(943 posts)There was a film at the film festival Telluride called 'Ask E. Jean'.
It was about E. Jean Carroll.
https://variety.com/2025/film/reviews/ask-e-jean-review-documentary-sued-trump-1236501909/
It has got some good reviews.
I do not think it has a distributor yet.
Some may stay away from it unless they experience the ire of one of the worst presidents ever.
twodogsbarking
(15,775 posts)Sounds extreme and crazy but look at where we are sports fans.