Court puts off deciding whether to consider $5 million verdict against Trump – yet again

SCOTUSblog ^ | Amy Howe

[thegagline]

When the justices meet for their private conference on Thursday, there is one high-profile petition for review they will not consider, *** an appeal by President Donald Trump seeking review of the $5 million jury verdict entered against him in the sexual abuse and defamation case filed by journalist E. Jean Carroll.

Carroll filed the lawsuit that led to the verdict in a federal court in New York in 2022. She contended that in 1996 Trump had sexually assaulted her in a dressing room at a Manhattan department store and then had defamed her in a 2022 social media post in which he described her accusations as (among other things) a “Hoax.”

The jury sided with Carroll and awarded her $5 million. A federal appeals court then upheld that verdict.

Trump came to the Supreme Court in November 2025, asking the justices to take up his case. In particular, he argued, Carroll’s lawyers should not have been allowed to introduce testimony by other women who also alleged that Trump had assaulted them, as well as the 2005 “Access Hollywood” tape in which Trump bragged about grabbing women by their genitals.

Carroll urged the court to deny review*** because the rest of her case was so strong.

On Jan. 28, the court “distributed” – that is, officially sent the briefs to the justices – the case for it to consider at its Feb. 20 conference. One day before that conference, however, the court “rescheduled” the case – that is, postponed its consideration of Trump’s petition. When the court reschedules a case, it does not provide an explanation; the rescheduling simply appears as a notation on the court’s electronic docket.

Over the past three months, the court has continued to reschedule Trump’s case – most recently on Wednesday, for the 11th time.***

---

TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: carroll; kaplan; supremecourt; trump

[thegagline]

E. Jean Carroll’s lawsuit was financed by Reid Hoffman with Judge Lewis Kaplan presiding. Lisa Birnbach was Carroll’s primary outcry witness. [interesting].

In Trump’s 314 page Petition for Writ of Certiorari, three questions were presented:
I. Whether Federal Rule of Evidence 415 overrides Rule 403’s requirement to balance the probative value of temporally remote propensity evidence against its prejudicial effect before such evidence can be admitted?
II. Whether Federal Rule of Evidence 413(d) authorizes the admission of temporally remote propensity evidence that the defendant committed the “crime” of “sexual assault” when the alleged prior act did not constitute a crime or a sexual assault?
III. Whether Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b)(2) permits the admission of “modus operandi” or “corroboration” evidence of prior “bad acts” without establishing a non-propensity purpose of the evidence, such as identity, absence of mistake, or another enumerated exception in Rule 404(b)(2)?

-FRE 415 “Similar Acts in Civil Cases Involving Sexual Assault or Child Molestation”
-FRE 403 “Excluding Relevant Evidence for Prejudice, Confusion, Waste of Time, or Other Reasons”
-FRE 413 “Similar Crimes in Sexual-Assault Cases”
-FRE 404 [at first blush, the strongest or second strongest argument] “Character Evidence; Other Crimes, Wrongs, or Acts”

As for the Supreme Court’s delay, my tinfoil hat notion is that the delay is related to the midterms. Logically, however, the Supreme Court frequently delays rendering options on cases.

[DeplorablePaul]

Yep. A NY appeal court threw out extraneous evidence presented against Harvey Weinstein and overturned his conviction. The biased political hack judge presiding in the E Jean’s case did the same thing. Not to mention that E jean’s case is ridiculous on the face of it. She’ll never get a cent.

[Gay State Conservative]

There's a great NYC talk show host named Mark Simone who talks about this often. He says that he has many friends who worked at Bergdorf’s at the time and *none* of them *ever* saw DJT there. Simone's a lifelong NYC resident and has many connections in the city,the state and elsewhere.

[ComputerGuy]

...because the rest of her case was so strong...

Huh? What was the evidence?

[TexasGator]

“Huh? What was the evidence?”

In the article ...

[TexasGator]

Oops. Wrong thread.

[cableguymn]

“Trust me bro”

And the judge did

[lee martell]

I thought Crazy-Jean had won a lawsuit against Trump for about $78 Million, or some ridiculous amount, not just for $5 Million, an amount which Nancy Pelosi would have labeled
as ‘Crumbs’.

[thegagline]

Huh? What was the evidence?

[dljordan]

Didn’t E jean do this to other men too?

[Blue Highway]

Yeah I thought I remember this lying nasty looking lady almost $100 million, something like $80 million or something crazy like that.

[Verginius Rufus]

First time I have seen a year mentioned--I thought in her lawsuit she couldn't "remember" the year. Of course the case could only be brought because of a special law passed by the New York legislature targeting Trump (otherwise it would have been barred by the statute of limitations). And apparently her whole story was based on an episode of a TV show.

How anyone can have any trust in the legal system any more, I don't know.

[Verginius Rufus]

I think the $93 million of whatever it was was because Trump “defamed” her by denying her false accusation.

[Dr. Franklin]

SCOTUS keeps kicking the can down the road. IMHO, the delay is so they can consider this case along with something else, and thus claim a broader jurisdiction so they can decide several issues at once, or decide this case based on additional facts, etc.

[thegagline]

She made claims against other men. She didn’t file a complaint them.

[Texan5]

Of course she didn’t-their pockets weren’t deep enough to give her a lawsuit lottery size win...

[UCANSEE2]

Did she file a police complaint against President Trump back whenever this supposed ‘rape’ occurred ?

[Blue Highway]

Did he have to pay her whatever that crazy amount was? IDA that a separate case then this $5 million case?