Appeals Court Issues Favorable Trump Ruling In E. Jean Carroll Case

A federal appeals court has handed President Donald Trump a procedural win in his ongoing legal battle with writer E. Jean Carroll, ruling that he does not have to pay an $83 million defamation award while his attorneys seek Supreme Court review.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York issued the order Monday after President Trump asked the court to pause an earlier ruling that blocked him from challenging the massive defamation award before the full appeals court.

The court agreed to pause the ruling after Carroll raised no objection, provided President Trump increases the bond by $7.46 million to account for interest expected to accumulate while the case continues through the legal system.

“We are pleased that the Second Circuit conditioned the stay on President Trump posting a bond of nearly $100 million,” Carroll’s attorney, Roberta Kaplan, told NBC News in a statement.

The amount reflects Trump’s earlier bond increase, which had already pushed the total to more than $91 million before Monday’s order.

President Trump’s legal team is attempting to use a federal law that would substitute the U.S. government as the defendant in Carroll’s defamation lawsuit. If that argument succeeds, it could effectively end the case because the federal government generally cannot be sued for defamation under current law.

A federal appeals court last month declined to rehear arguments connected to that strategy, prompting Trump’s attorneys to continue pushing the issue toward the Supreme Court.

A jury ruled in Carroll’s favor in 2024, finding that Trump defamed her when he denied her allegations regarding an encounter she claimed occurred in a department store dressing room in the 1990s.

President Trump has consistently denied Carroll’s accusations and is now seeking Supreme Court review. He previously asked the high court to consider his appeal in a separate $5 million defamation judgment that Carroll also won against him.

The Supreme Court was scheduled to hold a private conference on Feb. 20 to consider multiple petitions, including one filed by Trump asking the justices to review the 2023 verdict in Carroll’s civil lawsuit.

In that petition, Trump’s attorneys described Carroll’s allegations as “facially implausible” and “politically motivated.”

They argued that the case was “propped up” by what they called a series of flawed evidentiary rulings that allowed Carroll’s lawyers to introduce material opposed by Trump’s legal team.

“President Trump has clearly and consistently denied that this supposed incident ever occurred,” Trump’s attorneys wrote.

“No physical or DNA evidence corroborates Carroll’s story,” the filing continued.

“There were no eyewitnesses, no video evidence, and no police report or investigation,” the attorneys wrote.

Trump’s attorneys also emphasized that Carroll waited more than 20 years to publicly accuse him, doing so only after he became president.

According to Trump’s legal team, the timing allowed Carroll to “maximize political injury” to Trump and “profit for herself.”

The petition further argued that Carroll’s claims resembled the plot of an episode of “Law & Order,” a show Trump’s lawyers said is among Carroll’s favorites.

Trump’s attorneys also challenged the admission of testimony from Jessica Leeds and Natasha Stoynoff.

Leeds claimed Trump assaulted her on an airplane in 1979. Stoynoff claimed Trump attacked her at Mar-a-Lago in 2005.

Trump’s legal team argued that both accounts contained credibility concerns and inconsistencies.

The attorneys also objected to the use of the 2005 “Access Hollywood” recording, in which Trump made lewd remarks.

Carroll, a journalist and advice columnist, filed two lawsuits against Trump after publishing a book in 2019. In the book, she claimed Trump raped her in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room in 1996.

President Trump has repeatedly denied the allegations and called the case “a complete con job.”

He has also said Carroll was “not my type.”

“I don’t know this woman, have no idea who she is,” Trump wrote on Truth Social in October 2022.

The case has become another flashpoint in the broader legal war against President Trump, with conservatives arguing that politically charged lawsuits have been used to drain his time, money, and attention while he continues pushing forward with his second-term agenda.

For now, the appeals court’s order gives President Trump breathing room as he seeks Supreme Court intervention in one of the most closely watched civil cases involving the current President of the United States.