President Donald Trump expressed disappointment and surprise after the Supreme Court declined to reconsider the jury's verdict in the defamation and sexual abuse case brought by E. Jean Carroll. The decision, made on Monday, marked the end of Trump’s legal challenge to a $5 million judgment against him. Trump took to his social media platform, Truth Social, to voice his frustration, calling the case a "Fake Case" and accusing Carroll of fabricating the allegations. He emphasized that the New York state law allowing such lawsuits was temporary and specifically designed to target him. Despite the Supreme Court’s decision, Trump vowed to continue fighting the case, referring to it as an example of "Weaponization and Lawfare" against him.
The Supreme Court’s refusal to take up Trump’s appeal means that the $5 million judgment remains in effect. This verdict followed a 2023 civil trial where a jury found Trump liable for sexually abusing Carroll in a dressing room at a New York City department store in the mid-1990s and for defaming her by dismissing her allegations as a "con job" and "hoax." The trial lasted eight days, during which jurors heard testimony from two other women who accused Trump of similar misconduct. Additionally, the jury viewed a segment of the infamous "Access Hollywood" tape in which Trump made lewd remarks about women.
Carroll’s legal team had previously argued that the evidence presented was crucial in establishing a pattern of behavior consistent with Trump’s alleged actions. They maintained that the testimony from other accusers and the inclusion of the "Access Hollywood" footage were necessary to demonstrate the broader context of Trump’s conduct. The Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had already upheld the lower court’s decision in December 2024, rejecting Trump’s appeal on the grounds that the evidence did not deprive him of a fair trial.
Trump’s legal team had contested the admissibility of certain evidence, arguing that the trial judge, Lewis Kaplan, had improperly allowed testimony from other women and the use of the "Access Hollywood" tape. They claimed these elements were irrelevant and prejudicial, and that the lack of direct evidence linking Trump to the specific incident with Carroll undermined the jury’s findings. However, the appellate court disagreed, stating that the evidence was properly admitted and did not affect the outcome of the case.
In addition to the $5 million judgment, a separate jury in January 2024 ruled that Trump must pay Carroll an additional $83.3 million in damages for defamatory statements he made regarding her allegations. This second case is currently under appeal, and the Department of Justice is reportedly considering intervening to support Trump’s defense in this matter. The Supreme Court has not yet ruled on this second appeal, leaving the possibility open for further legal action.
Carroll, a former advice columnist and author, has consistently maintained that her allegations are true and that Trump’s denials are unfounded. She has stated that the primary goal of her legal battles is to ensure the public knows the truth rather than to seek financial gain. Her memoir, "Not My Type," released in 2025, detailed the aftermath of her initial lawsuit and received critical acclaim. Despite the legal setbacks, Carroll has remained resolute in her stance, emphasizing the importance of holding powerful individuals accountable for their actions.
The Supreme Court’s decision to reject Trump’s appeal underscores the difficulty faced by public figures in defending themselves against defamation claims. The case has drawn significant attention due to its implications for free speech and the rights of sexual assault survivors. While Trump has consistently denied the allegations, the legal system has affirmed the jury’s findings, reinforcing the principle that credible evidence and testimonies can lead to convictions even in high-profile cases. The ongoing appeals process for the $83.3 million judgment will likely continue to draw public interest and scrutiny, as it represents a substantial financial liability for the former president.
14 reports
Mother JonesIndependentLeft4 days agoThe U.S. Supreme Court has rejected Donald Trump's latest attempt to avoid paying E. Jean Carroll, a former employee who sued him over allegations of sexual assault. The court ruled against Trump's motion to dismiss the case, which he had argued was based on false claims. Carroll's lawsuit alleges that Trump sexually assaulted her during a shopping trip at Bergdorf Goodman in 2018. The decision marks another legal setback for Trump in ongoing civil cases related to his past conduct.
Bias read (Left): The article frames Trump's legal actions as attempts to evade accountability, aligning with progressive narratives that criticize his behavior and legal strategies. The focus on his repeated efforts to avoid financial responsibility suggests a left-leaning perspective, emphasizing justice and legal遵
Los Angeles TimesIndependent🔒Center4 days agoThe U.S. Supreme Court has denied former President Donald Trump's request to overturn a $5 million jury verdict against him in a defamation case involving E. Jean Carroll, a writer who accused him of sexual abuse. The court did not issue a written opinion, which is common when cases are dismissed without significant legal precedent. This decision leaves the lower court's ruling intact, meaning Trump remains liable for the damages awarded to Carroll. The case was part of a broader legal battle between Trump and Carroll, who claimed he sexually assaulted her in the 1990s. The ruling highlights ongoing legal challenges faced by Trump following multiple civil lawsuits.
Bias read (Center): The article presents a factual account of the Supreme Court's decision without overtly favoring either side. It does not include biased language, one-sided sourcing, or editorial commentary. The framing is neutral, focusing on the legal outcome rather than taking a stance on the allegations or the被告
Breitbart NewsIndependentRight4 days agoPresident Donald Trump expressed frustration over the Supreme Court's decision not to review the case brought by E. Jean Carroll, who alleges he defamed her in 2021. Trump claimed the case was a 'Fake Case' and criticized the law used to bring the suit, specifically New York's Adult Survivors Act, which allows victims of sexual assault to file claims beyond traditional statute of limitations periods. He accused the act of being tailored to target him and called the case a threat to the United States. Trump previously was found liable in the case in May 2023 and ordered to pay $5 million, with the ruling upheld in December 2024. Additionally, a separate civil jury awarded Carroll $83 million in January 2024, and the appellate court denied Trump's appeal in September 2024.
Bias read (Right): The article frames Trump's response to the Supreme Court's decision as a defense against what he calls 'Weaponization and Lawfare,' using strong language like 'Fake Case' and 'tailormade.' It emphasizes Trump's personal grievances and portrays the legal process as politically motivated, aligning the
The New York Times (US)Independent🔒Center4 days agoThe Supreme Court ruled against Roy Moore in his attempt to collect an $8.2 million jury award from a defamation case. Moore, a former Alabama Supreme Court justice and Senate candidate, had sought judicial review to challenge the award. The decision likely prevents him from receiving the compensation he was awarded by a lower court. The ruling highlights ongoing legal battles over defamation claims and the limits of judicial remedies.
Bias read (Center): The article presents the Supreme Court's ruling without overtly favoring any political ideology. It focuses on the legal outcome rather than taking a stance on Moore's personal conduct or political career. The framing remains neutral, emphasizing the legal process and its implications.
The HillIndependentRight4 days agoPresident Donald Trump expressed surprise at the U.S. Supreme Court's decision not to review the verdict in E. Jean Carroll's lawsuit against him. In the case, Trump was found liable for sexually abusive conduct and defamation related to an incident in the 1990s. The court's refusal to take up the case means the lower court's ruling stands. Trump's reaction highlights ongoing legal and personal controversies surrounding his past actions.
Bias read (Right): The article frames Trump's reaction to the Supreme Court's decision as a matter of personal surprise and indignation, using language that emphasizes his perceived victimhood and challenges the legitimacy of the court's decision. This framing aligns with a right-leaning perspective that often scrutin
The Washington TimesParty-alignedRight4 days agoThe U.S. Supreme Court has declined to review President Donald Trump's appeal in a defamation case involving E. Jean Carroll, leaving a $5 million judgment against him intact. Carroll accused Trump of sexual assault in the 1990s and later filed two defamation lawsuits after he denied the allegations. The first jury awarded her $5 million in damages, while the second jury awarded an additional $83.3 million. Trump has consistently denied the allegations and claimed the case was politically motivated. Reports indicate the Department of Justice may seek permission to intervene in the appeal of the larger $83.3 million judgment.
Bias read (Right): The article includes direct quotes from Trump's legal team that frame the accusations as politically motivated and emphasize the timing of the claims. It presents Trump's denial of wrongdoing without counterbalancing perspectives from Carroll or her legal representatives, potentially reinforcing a右倾
CBS News (US)IndependentCenter4 days agoThe U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear former President Donald Trump's appeal regarding a jury's verdict that found him liable for sexually abusing and defaming writer E. Jean Carroll. The unanimous federal jury determined that a preponderance of evidence supported Carroll's claim of sexual abuse during a 1990s incident in a New York City department store. Trump did not attend the 2023 civil trial, and his legal team did not call any witnesses. The jury awarded Carroll $5 million, and Trump had previously lost a separate defamation case involving Carroll, where he was ordered to pay $83 million. Trump's legal team has criticized the case as a 'Democrat-funded' hoax, while Carroll's attorney stated the Supreme Court's decision affirms the jury's verdict and ends Trump's attempts to avoid accountability.
Bias read (Center): The article presents the facts of the case neutrally, including statements from both Trump's legal team and Carroll's attorney. It does not exhibit overtly biased language or selective sourcing, providing balanced perspectives from both sides involved in the legal dispute.
The New York Times (US)Independent🔒Center4 days ago Supreme Court Rejects Trump’s Request to Appeal $5 Million Verdict in E. Jean Carroll CaseThe Supreme Court has rejected President Donald Trump's request to appeal a $5 million verdict against him in the case brought by writer E. Jean Carroll. The jury found that Trump had sexually harassed and defamed Carroll, leading to the award of damages. Trump had sought intervention from the Supreme Court, but his appeal was denied. This decision marks a significant legal outcome in the ongoing litigation involving Trump and allegations of sexual misconduct.
Bias read (Center): The article presents the legal outcome without overtly favoring either side. It reports the rejection of Trump's appeal as a factual event, without commentary on the broader implications of the ruling or the political ramifications. While the subject involves a high-profile political figure, the phr
AxiosIndependentCenter4 days agoThe U.S. Supreme Court has refused to overturn a $5 million civil verdict against former President Donald Trump, which ruled that he sexually assaulted and defamed writer E. Jean Carroll. The decision marks another legal defeat for Trump, who has consistently denied the allegations and claimed the accusations were false and politically motivated. The case had been ongoing for several years, with Trump repeatedly seeking to dismiss the verdict. The ruling leaves the original judgment intact, reinforcing the court's previous findings. This development continues to shape the broader legal landscape surrounding Trump's past actions.
Bias read (Center): The article presents the Supreme Court's rejection of Trump's appeal in a neutral manner, focusing on the legal outcome without overtly favoring either side. It includes context about Trump's position and the significance of the ruling but avoids explicit commentary or biased language.
The Washington TimesParty-alignedCenter4 days ago Supreme Court rejects Trump's push to toss $5 million verdict in E. Jean Carroll sexual abuse caseThe U.S. Supreme Court has refused to hear President Donald Trump's appeal against a $5 million jury verdict in a sexual abuse and defamation case involving writer E. Jean Carroll. The court did not provide an explanation for its decision, which is common in such cases. Trump's legal team had argued that the lower court made improper evidentiary rulings, allowing testimony from two other women who accused him of past sexual misconduct. Trump denies these allegations. The case involved claims that Trump sexually assaulted Carroll in 1996 and later defamed her by denying the accusation in 2022. Carroll's legal team defended the inclusion of similar allegations from other accusers, stating they were relevant and consistent with judicial standards elsewhere. The jury also awarded Carroll an additional $83.3 million in a separate defamation trial, which Trump is currently appealing.
Bias read (Center): The article presents both sides of the issue without overtly favoring one perspective. It includes quotes from both Trump's legal representatives and Carroll's legal team, providing balanced representation of their arguments. There is no evident editorializing or biased language that would indicate傾
NewsweekIndependentCenter4 days agoThe U.S. Supreme Court declined to intervene in President Donald Trump's effort to overturn a $5 million civil judgment against him in a case involving E. Jean Carroll, a journalist and former Elle columnist. The court's decision leaves the verdict intact, marking the end of Trump's challenge to the first federal verdict against him. The ruling suggests that a subsequent $83.3 million defamation award could also face similar scrutiny. The court did not provide reasoning or dissenting opinions, closing the door on Trump's claim that the trial was unfairly influenced by 'highly inflammatory' evidence. The Second Circuit had previously upheld the verdict, stating Trump failed to demonstrate the evidence prejudiced his rights. Trump has consistently denied Carroll's allegations, dismissing them as a 'hoax' and labeling her a 'nut job.' Carroll, who detailed the alleged assault in her 2019 memoir, plans to donate the proceeds from her upcoming book, emphasizing her commitment to exposing the truth.
Bias read (Center): While the article discusses a politically sensitive case involving a current president, the framing remains largely factual and balanced. It presents both sides—Trump's denial and Carroll's allegations—without overt ideological slant. The focus is on legal proceedings and judicial outcomes rather än
NBC NewsIndependentCenter4 days agoThe Supreme Court rejected President Donald Trump's appeal to overturn a 2023 jury verdict that found him liable for sexually assaulting and defaming writer E. Jean Carroll, resulting in a $5 million civil judgment. The case originated from a 2019 allegation by Carroll that Trump assaulted her in a department store dressing room in 1996, with defamation claims based on his post-presidency comments labeling her claims as a 'con job' and 'hoax.' Trump's legal team argued that Manhattan District Judge Lewis Kaplan improperly allowed testimony from other accusers and permitted jurors to view the 'Access Hollywood' tape, claiming these decisions skewed the outcome. Carroll's attorneys countered that the evidence highlighted Trump's pattern of behavior and was relevant to her claims. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals previously upheld the verdict, finding the evidentiary rulings did not affect the outcome. Trump separately faces another defamation case over $83.3 million, which remains under appeal.
Bias read (Center): The article presents both sides of the argument: Trump's legal team frames the case as politically motivated and biased, while Carroll's side emphasizes the relevance of the evidence and judicial support. The framing does not clearly favor one ideological perspective over the other, maintaining a平衡.
Bloomberg NewsIndependent🔒Center4 days agoThe US Supreme Court has declined to hear an appeal from former President Donald Trump regarding a jury's verdict that he sexually abused and defamed writer E. Jean Carroll. This decision allows the jury's ruling to stand, which includes a $5 million award for Carroll. The case centered around allegations made by Carroll against Trump, which were previously ruled upon by a lower court. The Supreme Court's refusal to intervene means the legal judgment remains unchanged, allowing Carroll to proceed with collecting the awarded damages.
Bias read (Center): The article presents a factual account of the Supreme Court's decision without apparent bias or loaded language. It reports on the legal outcome without taking a stance on the merits of the case or the individuals involved.
The Daily WireIndependentLeft4 days agoThe Supreme Court has denied President Donald Trump's appeal in a $5 million defamation case brought by E. Jean Carroll, a 82-year-old woman who alleges that Trump sexually assaulted her in the 1990s at a department store. The decision means Trump is now obligated to pay Carroll $5 million as per a 2023 ruling. Carroll claimed that Trump defamed her by denying the allegations, calling her 'not his type,' and suggesting she fabricated the claim for book sales. Trump criticized the ruling as part of a 'fake case' and vowed to continue fighting the legal battle, which he described as an attack on the U.S. and its laws. The case is separate from another ongoing lawsuit where a 2024 verdict ordered Trump to pay over $83 million in additional damages. Both cases were resolved in different orders, with the $5 million ruling stemming from a 2022 case and the $83 million from a 2019 filing.
Bias read (Left): The article frames Trump's legal actions as politically motivated and dismissive of the legal process, using terms like 'Fake Case' and 'Weaponization and Lawfare Case.' It highlights Trump's public criticism of the court's decision and his broader claims of injustice, which align with a leftward sl
★
Keep the news honest.
ObjectiveNews is reader-funded and ad-free — we show you the bias instead of hiding it. Support independent journalism for €5/month.
Become a Supporter
United States
