The United States Supreme Court has rejected President Donald Trump’s second attempt to overturn the $5 million civil verdict won by writer E. Jean Carroll, effectively ending his remaining challenge to the 2023 jury decision that found him liable for sexually abusing and defaming her. The justices on Monday, August 17, denied Trump’s request to reconsider their June decision declining to hear the case, issuing the order without explanation as is customary for such denials. Carroll has already received more than $5.6 million from Trump, representing the original damages award plus accumulated interest after the money was released following the earlier Supreme Court decision. The ruling closes one major chapter in the years-long litigation between Trump and Carroll, although a far larger $83.3 million defamation judgment involving comments Trump made during his first presidency is now separately before the Supreme Court.
The August 17 action is particularly significant because requests for Supreme Court rehearing are rarely successful, leaving Trump without another conventional avenue for challenging the $5 million judgment. His attorneys had argued that errors during the 2023 trial made the verdict unfair and had urged the justices to reconsider their earlier refusal to intervene. The Supreme Court declined to do so, leaving intact both the jury’s findings and the lower-court decisions that had previously upheld them.
Supreme Court’s second rejection effectively ends Trump’s challenge to the 2023 Carroll verdict
The dispute traces back to Carroll’s allegation that Trump attacked her in a dressing room at the Bergdorf Goodman department store in Manhattan during the 1990s. Trump has consistently denied the allegation, and his public responses eventually became the basis for separate defamation claims brought by Carroll.
A federal jury in 2023 found Trump liable for sexually abusing Carroll and later defaming her through statements he made in 2022, when he was out of office. The jury did not find Trump liable for rape under the specific legal question presented to it, but it concluded that Carroll had proved sexual abuse and awarded her a combined $5 million in damages.
Trump appealed the verdict, arguing among other things that evidence admitted during the trial unfairly prejudiced the jury. The federal appeals court rejected his arguments, and Trump subsequently asked the Supreme Court to intervene. When the justices declined to hear that appeal in June 2026, no justice publicly noted a dissent from the decision.
Trump then sought rehearing, essentially asking the Supreme Court to reconsider its refusal. On August 17, the justices rejected that request as part of an unsigned order, leaving the original verdict intact. The court provided no explanation, and such rehearing requests are granted only in unusual circumstances.
The outcome means the legal dispute surrounding the $5 million verdict has reached the end of the appellate road. Carroll has already received the money, making Monday’s decision less about whether payment will occur and more about finalizing the judgment against a sitting president who has spent years attempting to overturn it.
Carroll has already received more than $5.6 million after Trump’s earlier Supreme Court defeat
The financial portion of the judgment was largely resolved before Monday’s order. Trump had placed money into a court-controlled account while his appeals proceeded, preventing Carroll from immediately accessing the award while the litigation remained active.
After the Supreme Court initially declined the case in June, United States District Judge Lewis Kaplan authorized the release of the funds. Carroll subsequently collected approximately $5.63 million, reflecting the original $5 million verdict plus interest that accumulated during the lengthy appeals process.
Trump’s lawyers had attempted to stop the distribution, arguing that allowing Carroll to use the funds while further legal avenues were being pursued could cause irreversible consequences if the judgment were later overturned. Kaplan rejected that effort, and the federal appeals court also declined to prevent Carroll from receiving the money.
Monday’s Supreme Court decision now removes the remaining uncertainty surrounding that award. Even if the justices ultimately agree to examine Trump’s separate $83.3 million Carroll case, the $5 million judgment itself remains intact following the court’s refusal to reopen the earlier proceeding.
Trump’s much larger $83.3 million E. Jean Carroll judgment remains unresolved
The legal battle between Trump and Carroll is not finished because the Supreme Court is separately considering whether to hear Trump’s challenge to an $83.3 million defamation verdict awarded by another federal jury in 2024. That case arises from statements Trump made in 2019 after Carroll first publicly accused him of attacking her.
Unlike the statements underlying the $5 million judgment, Trump made the 2019 comments while serving his first term as president. His lawyers therefore argue that presidential immunity should protect him from civil liability arising from those statements and that lower courts incorrectly concluded he could not rely on that defense.
The Justice Department has also become involved in that separate appeal, supporting arguments that Trump was acting in his presidential capacity when he responded to Carroll’s accusation. The Supreme Court has not yet decided whether it will hear the $83.3 million case, making that petition the next major legal test in the long-running dispute.
The distinction between the two cases is important. The 2022 remarks connected to the $5 million verdict were made while Trump was a private citizen between his two presidential terms, whereas the earlier statements underlying the $83.3 million judgment occurred while he occupied the White House. That difference allows Trump’s lawyers to raise an immunity argument in the larger case that does not apply in the same way to the judgment finalized Monday.
Presidential immunity could make the $83.3 million appeal far more consequential
Trump’s remaining Carroll appeal could carry significance beyond the size of the financial judgment because it asks the Supreme Court to address how presidential immunity principles apply to civil litigation arising from statements made while a president is in office. Trump’s attorneys contend that he should have been protected from liability because his 2019 comments were made in his official capacity.
The argument comes after the Supreme Court’s landmark 2024 ruling establishing substantial criminal immunity for presidents when performing official acts. That decision dealt with criminal prosecution rather than private civil lawsuits, meaning it does not automatically resolve Trump’s dispute with Carroll.
Whether the justices take the $83.3 million case could therefore determine whether the court wants to clarify the boundaries between presidential duties and personal conduct in civil litigation. Lower courts have rejected Trump’s effort to escape the judgment, but Supreme Court review could potentially create a broader precedent governing future lawsuits involving presidential statements.
For Carroll, the stakes are also considerably larger financially. The 2024 jury awarded $83.3 million after concluding that Trump had defamed her through his earlier public denials, making the second judgment more than 16 times larger than the verdict that became effectively final on Monday.
August 17 ruling gives Carroll a definitive victory in one case while another Supreme Court fight continues
The Supreme Court’s latest rejection does not create new precedent because the justices declined to hear the dispute rather than issuing a substantive ruling on the merits. It nevertheless has a concrete effect by allowing the 2023 verdict and its findings to stand without another opportunity for Trump to seek review from a higher court.
That distinction matters in understanding the political and legal significance of the decision. The court did not independently determine whether Trump sexually abused or defamed Carroll; a federal jury made those findings, and subsequent courts rejected Trump’s efforts to overturn them. Monday’s action simply means the Supreme Court will not disturb that result.
Trump continues to deny wrongdoing and has repeatedly challenged the legitimacy of Carroll’s allegations and the proceedings against him. Carroll, meanwhile, has now secured both the money associated with the first judgment and finality in the appellate process surrounding that case.
Attention will consequently shift toward the separate $83.3 million appeal. If the Supreme Court declines that case as well, Trump would suffer another major legal setback and the second judgment would remain intact. If the justices agree to hear it, however, the dispute could evolve into a much broader examination of presidential immunity and civil liability for statements made from the White House.
Key takeaways from the Supreme Court’s latest Trump-E. Jean Carroll decision
- The United States Supreme Court rejected Donald Trump’s request to reconsider its refusal to hear his appeal of E. Jean Carroll’s $5 million civil judgment.
- A federal jury in 2023 found Trump liable for sexually abusing Carroll and defaming her through statements he made in 2022.
- The Supreme Court had already declined Trump’s appeal in June, and Monday’s August 17 order rejected his unusual request for rehearing.
- Carroll has already collected approximately $5.63 million from Trump, including the original damages award and accumulated interest.
- Monday’s action effectively ends Trump’s remaining appellate challenge to the $5 million verdict and leaves the jury’s findings intact.
- Trump continues to deny Carroll’s allegations and has maintained that the 2023 trial and verdict were unfair.
- A separate $83.3 million defamation judgment against Trump remains before the Supreme Court and involves statements he made about Carroll while president in 2019.
- That larger appeal could become more consequential because Trump is arguing that presidential immunity protects him from liability for statements made while serving in the White House.
Discover more from Business-News-Today.com
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
