We’ll see. I read a story that the judgement was out of line for actual damages; and thus the punitive damages would also be reduced proportionately. So he may lose the case, but get closer to $70 million of it back if the money damages are reduced to something closer to reality.
There may also be a federal ex post facto law challenge. The state retroactively changed the statute of limitations on these suits. It’s pretty obvious they did that specifically to allow her case to go forward. Her case was previously dismissed because the statute of limitations had expired, so the state expanded it just for a 1 year period. That change also ensnared a lot of their people into civil suits. Some rappers/hip hop moguls in particular. Seems wildly unfair to pass a law 20 years after the fact to allow 20 year old accusations to go to court.
“There may also be a federal ex post facto law challenge. The state retroactively changed the statute of limitations on these suits.”
The change in the statute of limitations applied only to her claim of sexual assault. She also claimed defamation, based on Trump’s recent statements. Those claims were timely, based on the previously established statute of limitations.
The distinction is important because this second judgment, the much bigger one, is entirely for defamation (the first judgment partially so). If a federal court takes the drastic step of nullifying a state law, it would reduce the first judgment from $5 million to $3 million. There would be no effect on the second judgment. Trump would still owe upwards of $80 million.