A federal appeals court on Monday affirmed an $83.3 million judgment against President Donald Trump in a defamation case brought by writer E. Jean Carroll, rejecting the president’s claim of presidential immunity and finding no reversible error in the trial proceedings.
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, sitting in a three-judge panel, upheld a lower court decision that found Trump defamed Carroll after she accused him of sexually assaulting her in the 1990s. The panel said it saw no basis to revisit its earlier ruling on presidential immunity and concluded the trial court did not err in the rulings challenged on appeal.
In an opinion released Monday, the court wrote, "We conclude that Trump has failed to identify any grounds that would warrant reconsidering our prior holding on presidential immunity. We also conclude that the district court did not err in any of the challenged rulings and that the jury's damages awards are fair and reasonable." The opinion added that the record supports the district court’s determination that the "degree of reprehensibility" of Trump’s conduct was "remarkably high, perhaps unprecedented."
Carroll, a longtime advice columnist and writer, first accused Trump of sexually assaulting her in a department store dressing room in the 1990s in a 2019 book. Trump has denied the assault, at times saying he did not know Carroll and describing her as not his "type," and he has characterized the claims as fabricated. Carroll sued Trump twice after the book's publication, including a defamation claim tied to the president’s public denials and comments.
At trial, jurors found for Carroll on the defamation claims and awarded compensatory and punitive damages that together total roughly $83.3 million. Trump’s lawyers argued on appeal that his statements were protected by presidential immunity and that various trial rulings and evidentiary decisions were improper. The appeals court rejected those arguments and declined to overturn the jury’s finding on damages.
The appeals court’s decision follows an earlier ruling by the same court this year in which judges rejected another Trump appeal related to the case, including disputes over evidence presented to the jury. That dispute had involved, among other items, the Access Hollywood recording that surfaced during Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. The full court declined a request to rehear that appeal.
The 2nd Circuit’s latest ruling leaves the president with the option of either accepting the appeals court’s judgment or seeking further review at the U.S. Supreme Court. A Supreme Court appeal would likely raise questions about presidential immunity from civil litigation for statements made while holding office and could take months to be resolved.
Legal scholars, advocates and the parties themselves have previously framed the case as testing the bounds of presidential immunity for conduct alleged to have occurred before a president took office and for public statements made while serving as president. The appeals court’s opinion emphasized the trial record and the jury’s assessment of damages while rejecting the immunity defense presented by Trump’s legal team.
Representatives for Trump and Carroll did not immediately issue public statements following the appeals court ruling. The decision marks a significant legal setback for the president as multiple civil and criminal matters proceed through state and federal courts.
The appeals court ruling is part of a broader sequence of litigation stemming from Carroll’s allegations and subsequent public exchanges. Carroll’s legal victories at the trial and appellate levels have had ramifications for both defamation law and ongoing public debates about accountability for high-profile public figures.
The case now awaits the parties’ next moves, which could include a petition for a writ of certiorari asking the Supreme Court to review the 2nd Circuit’s decision.