Posted on 10/27/2020 10:47:44 AM PDT by Coronal
WASHINGTON A federal judge in New York ruled Tuesday that the Justice Department cannot step in to shield President Donald Trump from a libel lawsuit filed by a woman who claims he raped her in a New York City department store more than 20 years ago.
The Justice Department had sought to block the lawsuit, filed by former gossip columnist E. Jean Carroll, by arguing that the president was acting in his official capacity when he told White House reporters that she made up the rape story.
Carroll sued, claiming that his statements branding her a liar damaged her reputation. Because federal law does not permit suing public officials for libel, the government said, the lawsuit should be dismissed.
But U.S. District Court Judge Lewis Kaplan said in his ruling Tuesday that the government was wrong on two counts. First, he said, the law applies only to federal employees, defined as officers of federal agencies a description that does not include the president, who is in a different legal status.
Second, the judge said, the president's statements about something that happened more than two decades before are not within the scope of his official conduct.
"President Trump's views on the plaintiff's sexual assault allegation may be interesting to some, but they reveal nothing about the operation of government," Kaplan wrote.
"A comment about government action, public policy, or even an election is categorically different than a comment about an alleged sexual assault that took place roughly twenty years before the president took office," he wrote.
Accepting the government's view, he said, "would mean that a president is free to defame anyone who criticizes his conduct or impugns his character."
(Excerpt) Read more at nbcnews.com ...
She made these charges because he is President and not for any other reason. Therefore it is against him in his capacity as President.
Anyway, this will now go on the merry-go-round of appeals.
So ... Senators and Reps can be sued for what they say on the floor ... because they are not government employees? And if what they say doesn’t meet this judge’s criteria, they can be sued? If it is so for Trump, it is so for every other elected official.
This is the new “Palin” strategy to attempt to sue politicians out of office.
She is a certifiable lunatic. She’s provided zero evidence for her accusations. She lost her job because of her crazy antics then turned round and tried to extort money from Trump on made up sh*t, after screwing up her own life.
A real beauty she is.
So all Democrat public officials can now also be personally bankrupted by campaigns of multiple fraudulent accusations?
I think this was similar to how Sarah Palin was hounded out of office - the costs to defend against politically motivated attacks are foisted upon the office holder personally.
Just in time for the election to "remind" the women.
She is suing him. The case is Carroll v. Trump (1:20-cv-07311) . She’s the plaintiff.
Shes says dna on a dress. Seems like we've seen this before.
Seems pretty easy to determine either way.
She might have been a 6.5-7 in really good makeup and lighting, in her prime.
Not comparable to the models and beauty queens Trump goes for.
But her story’s already been completely debunked. I believe the store she said it happened in didn’t have any changing rooms in the lingerie department so her story is actually impossible as described.
“So ... Senators and Reps can be sued for what they say on the floor ... because they are not government employees?”
Sounds like all those congress critters who said “Trump colluded with Russia” about 1000 times have some liability exposure...
all presidents are immune from lawsuits while in office
otherwise obama and clinton would have had multiple lawsuits against them while in office
Crazy eyes. Keeping a dress for decades sounds like crazy eyes, regardless of the dna donor.
Umm, she made unproven allegations against his character
that are so negative they are 100% defamatory
where are these same people ripping her for defaming a sitting president’s character
oh, they don’t like the sitting president
theats why they defended obama against negative statements but not Teump
oh i see now
There are photos of them together. Trump has met tons of peeps.
After looking at her picture, I can see where almost anyone could make fun of her looks. I’ve seen better looking in a corn field. And better dressed also. Somebody give her a stick to lean against.
rwood
There are photos of her in the same place as Trump or photos of them together?
For example, I saw Trump long ago when I was at the Trump Tower and he walked through the lobby and stopped and talked to people, and lots of pictures of him were being taken. I could very well have been in some of the pictures. Does it mean I know him or he knows me? Nope.
First lady to the right of Trump.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.