E Jean Carroll Defamation Case: Federal Appeals Court Upholds $83.3 Million Jury Award Against Trump

(MENAFN- Live Mint) A federal appeals court on Monday upheld a civil jury's ruling that President Donald Trump must pay $83.3 million to longtime advice columnist E. Jean Carroll for defaming her on social media following her sexual assault allegations.

A three-judge panel of the 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Trump's appeal, which argued the damages were excessive and that a new trial was warranted in light of the Supreme Court's expansion of presidential immunity.

The court concluded that Trump's“extraordinary and unprecedented” attacks on Carroll justified the steep award.“Given the unique and egregious facts of this case, we conclude that the punitive damages award did not exceed the bounds of reasonableness,” the ruling said.

Carroll's legal team responds

Carroll's attorney, Roberta Kaplan, welcomed the decision.“Earlier today, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed, in a comprehensive 70-page ruling, that E. Jean Carroll was telling the truth, and that President Donald Trump was not,” Kaplan said. She added that Carroll had faced threats throughout the legal process and that they“look forward to an end to the appellate process.”

Background of the case

The ruling concerns the second of two defamation awards stemming from Trump's repeated attacks on Carroll after she accused him of sexual assault in her 2019 memoir. In the memoir, Carroll described a 1996 encounter at Bergdorf Goodman's Manhattan store that allegedly escalated into a violent sexual assault.

The first jury, in 2023, found Trump liable for sexual assault but determined the act did not meet New York's legal definition of rape. That trial resulted in a $5 million award covering both the assault and Trump's public statements denying it.

A second trial, focusing solely on additional defamation damages, awarded Carroll $83.3 million . During the trial, Trump was barred from arguing his innocence of the alleged attack before the jury, as that issue had been resolved by the first verdict.

Court upholds damages

The appeals court ruled on Monday that the trial judge had acted appropriately in limiting the scope of the second trial and that the jury's damage awards were reasonable given the“extraordinary and egregious facts of this case.”

(With AP inputs)

Also Read | Trump calls to 'bring back religion in America': 'When faith gets weaker, our...'

MENAFN08092025007365015876ID1110033412