A federal appeals court has temporarily paused the enforcement of an $83.3 million defamation judgment against President Donald Trump, allowing him to seek review from the U.S. Supreme Court. The ruling, issued by a federal appeals court, marks a significant procedural development in the years-long legal battle initiated by writer E. Jean Carroll. While the underlying verdicts of liability remain intact, collection efforts for the substantial award are now on hold as the legal process continues.
The dispute originated from two civil trials brought by Ms. Carroll, who alleged that President Trump sexually assaulted her in the 1990s and then defamed her by denying her claims. In 2023, a Manhattan jury found President Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation, awarding Ms. Carroll $5 million in damages. Subsequently, in January 2024, a second jury ordered President Trump to pay an additional $83.3 million for further defamatory statements he made denying Ms. Carroll's allegations. Both verdicts have since been upheld by federal appeals courts.
The recent appeals court decision does not overturn or vacate either of these verdicts. Instead, it specifically pauses the enforcement of the $83.3 million judgment while President Trump's legal team prepares to petition the Supreme Court for review. To ensure the availability of funds should the judgment ultimately be upheld, the appeals court mandated that President Trump increase the bond securing the judgment. This adjusted bond brings the total financial guarantee close to $100 million, a condition that Ms. Carroll's attorneys did not oppose, provided the increase was implemented.
Central to President Trump's legal strategy is the argument that statements he made while serving as president are protected under the doctrine of presidential immunity. His legal team contends that such statements cannot form the basis of civil liability. Additionally, President Trump's attorneys have challenged various evidentiary rulings made during both trials and are seeking Supreme Court review for both the $5 million and $83.3 million judgments.
However, federal appeals courts have consistently rejected these arguments. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which upheld both jury verdicts, previously declined to rehear the case en banc. This decision significantly narrows President Trump's remaining legal avenues, primarily leaving a request for review by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court holds discretion over whether to accept a case for full review.
Should the Supreme Court decline to hear the appeal, the appellate rulings confirming the judgments will remain in effect, and the enforcement of the judgment could proceed under the bond conditions already imposed by the appeals court. Conversely, if the Supreme Court agrees to hear the appeal, the case would enter a full review process, which could extend for many months or potentially longer.
The Carroll litigation has attracted considerable national attention due to its dual nature: involving both jury findings of liability against a sitting president and complex constitutional questions concerning the scope of presidential immunity for statements made while in office. President Trump has consistently denied Ms. Carroll's allegations and continues to challenge both verdicts through the federal appellate system. For the immediate future, the case remains in a holding pattern, with the judgments standing but their enforcement temporarily halted as President Trump pursues further relief through the federal courts and potentially the nation's highest judicial body.
