The Supreme Court has declined to hear Donald Trump's final appeal of the $5 million civil verdict awarded to writer E. Jean Carroll, closing the last avenue for the former and current president to challenge the jury's findings in federal court. The justices offered no explanation for the denial, which is standard practice when the court declines to take up a case.
A federal jury in New York found in May 2023 that Trump had sexually abused Carroll in a department store dressing room in the mid-1990s and subsequently defamed her. The jury awarded Carroll $5 million in damages. Trump has consistently denied the allegations and the underlying findings of the jury.
The Supreme Court's refusal to intervene leaves intact rulings from lower federal courts that had already rejected Trump's legal challenges to the verdict. With no remaining appellate avenues in the federal system, the civil judgment against Trump stands as final.
The case has been among the most prominent civil legal proceedings against Trump in recent years. Carroll's attorneys argued throughout the litigation that Trump used his public platform to repeatedly deny and demean her, compounding the original harm. Trump's legal team had sought review on several procedural and substantive grounds, all of which courts declined to accept.
Left-Leaning Emphasis
- The Guardian frames the ruling as a significant legal accountability moment for Trump, emphasizing the finality of the verdict.
- The Guardian highlights Carroll's long legal battle against a sitting or former president as historically notable.
Right-Leaning Emphasis
- The Hill notes the Supreme Court denial in the context of other pending legal and procedural matters involving Trump and the courts.
- Coverage in center-right adjacent outlets tends to present the development in a more procedural framing, focusing on the mechanics of the appeal denial rather than its implications.