In a significant legal development, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York upheld a jury's verdict finding former President Donald Trump liable for sexually abusing and defaming columnist E. Jean Carroll. The decision, issued on Thursday, maintains the $5 million damages award previously ordered by the lower court.
The three-judge panel affirmed a December 2023 decision that denied Trump’s request to overturn the jury’s findings. This ruling comes after the jury’s original verdict in May 2023, which awarded Carroll $2.02 million for sexual abuse and $2.98 million for defamation. It is important to note that the jurors did not find Trump liable for rape.
The case stems from allegations made by Carroll, now 81, who accused Trump of sexually abusing her in a department store dressing room in Manhattan during the mid-1990s. Trump has consistently denied the allegations. Following the appeals court’s decision, Carroll reacted publicly on social media, posting a celebratory message and saying goodbye to Trump.
In response, a Trump spokesperson condemned the decision, calling it “liberal lawfare” and accused Democrats of politicizing the legal system to target Trump. The Trump team’s statement also claimed that the Justice Department should take over Trump’s defense, arguing that Carroll’s defamation claims stemmed from official presidential conduct.
Last month, Trump failed to convince the same appeals court to reconsider the $5 million award, which reaffirmed the jury’s original decision. Carroll had suggested that Trump might have influenced the jury’s decision had he testified during the civil trial. During a joint livestream with former U.S. attorney Joyce Vance, Carroll speculated that Trump could have swayed at least one juror in his favor.
She argued that Trump’s absence from the trial was strategic, influenced by his attorney, Joe Tacopina, who persuaded him not to appear in court. Carroll claimed that cross-examination by her lawyer, Robbie Kaplan, would have been difficult for Trump to endure had he taken the stand.
Despite her confidence in the case’s outcome, Carroll acknowledged that the jury’s composition might have allowed for a different result if Trump had testified. She pointed out that several jurors came from upstate New York, including Orange County, a region where Trump won support in the 2024 election, emphasizing that the jury was not composed of liberal Manhattan residents but rather from areas considered favorable to Trump.
Carroll concluded that if Trump had sat through cross-examination and testified, he may have convinced one juror to block a unanimous verdict, potentially hanging the jury. Trump now has 90 days to file a petition with the U.S. Supreme Court to challenge the appellate ruling. Until then, the financial judgment remains enforceable.
