Trump Asks Supreme Court to Overturn E. Jean Carroll Verdict — A Fresh Test of Evidence Rules, Defamation Law, and Presidential Accountability
On November 10–11, 2025, President Donald Trump petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to throw out a 2023 civil jury verdict that found him liable for sexually abusing and defaming writer E. Jean Carroll — a move that could ripple into a separate $83.3 million defamation judgment the Second Circuit upheld in September. The filing challenges how evidence was handled at trial and seeks to recast the legal stakes around two civil cases that have dogged Trump through campaigns, governing, and litigation alike. [1]
- What’s new today: Trump’s attorneys filed a cert petition asking the Supreme Court to overturn the $5 million “Carroll II” verdict, arguing the trial court admitted “highly inflammatory” evidence. The request follows a September 8 Second Circuit ruling upholding the separate $83.3 million “Carroll I” defamation award. [2]
- Why it matters: A Supreme Court review could clarify how federal evidence rules apply in civil sexual‑assault cases and whether the 2023 verdict’s preclusive effect on the 2024 damages trial was proper — with potential implications for both judgments. [3]
What Happened — And What Trump Is Arguing
In a petition filed by counsel Justin D. Smith, Trump asks the justices to overturn the May 2023 jury verdict that found him liable for sexual abuse and defamation over statements he made in 2022, contending the district court erroneously allowed “propensity” and other prejudicial evidence, including testimony from other women and the “Access Hollywood” tape. The filing follows a Supreme Court–approved extension that moved Trump’s deadline to November 10, 2025. [4]
Trump’s filing says the case was “propped up” by “indefensible evidentiary rulings” and calls Carroll’s claims a “politically motivated hoax,” previewing a merits fight focused on evidence and trial management rather than broad constitutional immunity. [5]
How We Got Here: Two Civil Cases, Two Big Verdicts
Carroll II (2023 verdict)
Jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation based on 2022 statements; total damages $5 million. The Second Circuit later affirmed key aspects of that case in 2024–2025 rulings. This is the verdict Trump now wants the Supreme Court to overturn. [7]
Carroll I (2024 verdict)
Separate jury awarded $83.3 million for Trump’s 2019 comments; the Second Circuit unanimously upheld on September 8, 2025, rejecting presidential-immunity and other arguments and deeming the damages “fair and reasonable.” [8]
Why the linkage matters
Trump’s brief argues errors in Carroll II infected Carroll I because the second trial’s findings informed the first case’s damages posture. If the Supreme Court disturbs the 2023 verdict, it could affect collateral issues in the $83.3 million case. [9]
The Legal Questions Likely to Draw the Court’s Attention
1) Other‑Acts Evidence in Civil Sexual‑Assault Cases
Trump contends the district court wrongly admitted testimony from other accusers and the “Access Hollywood” tape, framing the rulings as impermissible “propensity” evidence. Carroll’s team has argued that the evidence was properly admitted under the Federal Rules of Evidence and was essential to evaluating credibility and context. The Second Circuit previously rejected Trump’s challenges to the trial court’s evidentiary calls in upholding the related $83.3 million judgment. [10]
2) Interaction Between Carroll I and Carroll II
Judge Lewis A. Kaplan instructed the 2024 damages jury to accept the prior jury’s finding that Trump sexually abused Carroll, narrowing the issues for the second trial. The Second Circuit has largely endorsed the lower court’s management of the overlapping cases and rebuffed post‑hoc efforts by Trump and the government to substitute the United States under the Westfall Act after trial. [11]
3) Presidential Immunity and Westfall Act Maneuvers
Although the new petition centers on evidence, Trump’s broader appeals tried to leverage presidential‑immunity theories and late Westfall Act substitution. The Second Circuit said immunity was waived and inapplicable here, and it rejected substitution as untimely and statutorily barred. Those holdings set the current posture: the Supreme Court is not being asked to revisit criminal‑immunity doctrines but to police trial‑level evidentiary discretion. [12]
Today’s Political Context
The cert petition lands as Trump navigates multiple legal and policy fights from the White House and as Congress grapples with end‑of‑shutdown legislation — a backdrop that makes any Supreme Court action part legal checkpoint, part political Rorschach. Trump’s team frames the case as “Liberal Lawfare,” while Carroll’s counsel has said they see no issues warranting Supreme Court review. [13]
| Potential Supreme Court Action | What It Means Legally | Political/Practical Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Deny cert | Second Circuit outcomes stand; $5M and $83.3M judgments remain intact (subject to ongoing collection procedures). [14] | Maintains current legal exposure; minimal new doctrine; issue fades from Court’s docket but remains in political discourse. |
| Grant and affirm | High Court blesses trial court’s evidentiary rulings; could solidify how other‑acts evidence is used in civil sexual‑assault cases. | Strengthens precedential footing of both verdicts; diminishes Trump’s legal leverage on appeal. |
| Grant and reverse (full or partial) | Could order a new trial or exclude disputed evidence; may unsettle the preclusive effect used in Carroll I. [15] | Reframes narrative; invites renewed litigation; potential political boost for Trump if damages are reduced or retrial ordered. |
Statements and Reactions
Carroll’s side (earlier this fall): “We do not believe that President Trump will be able to present any legal issues in the Carroll cases that merit review by the United States Supreme Court.” [16]
Trump’s team today: The appeal is part of a broader fight against “Liberal Lawfare,” and the petition argues trial rulings allowed “highly inflammatory” evidence. [17]
What to Watch Next 🧭
Cert timeline
The Court will first decide whether to hear the case; four votes are needed to grant review. A decision on cert could arrive in early 2026. [18]
Second Circuit baseline
September’s unanimous decision upholding the $83.3 million award sets a robust appellate backdrop — one the Supreme Court would have to disturb to alter the current posture. [19]
Collateral effects
If the justices recalibrate evidentiary standards in Carroll II, parties will likely litigate how that affects Carroll I’s findings and damages. [20]
Analysis: The Stakes for Law and Politics ⚖️🗳️
For the Supreme Court
This petition lets the Court clarify the boundary between character and credibility evidence in civil sexual‑assault trials — a technical, fact‑bound area where the justices often defer to lower courts. The absence of a clean circuit split may weigh against granting review. [21]
For Trump
A cert grant could open a path to a retrial or narrower evidentiary universe; a denial would lock in two costly judgments. The filing also aligns with a political narrative of contesting legal setbacks amid other high‑salience policy fights. [22]
For Carroll and future plaintiffs
Leaving the rulings intact would reinforce trial‑court discretion to admit pattern evidence in civil sexual‑assault cases; a reversal could tighten evidentiary gateways and complicate damages strategies that rely on prior findings. [23]
Methodology and Sourcing
This report draws on the cert petition coverage published November 10–11, 2025; the Supreme Court docket showing the extension of time to file; and the Second Circuit’s September 8, 2025 decision upholding the $83.3 million verdict, including opinions and summaries available via reputable legal repositories and wire services. [24]
References
- Politico, “Trump asks Supreme Court to overturn E. Jean Carroll civil verdict,” November 11, 2025. [25]
- Washington Post/AP, “Trump asks Supreme Court to throw out E. Jean Carroll’s $5 million verdict,” November 10, 2025. [26]
- AP News, “Appeals court upholds E. Jean Carroll’s $83.3M defamation judgment against Trump,” September 2025. [27]
- Reuters, “Trump fails to overturn E. Jean Carroll’s $83 million verdict,” September 8, 2025. [28]
- Supreme Court docket (No. 25A250): Extension order setting November 10, 2025 filing deadline. [29]
- Second Circuit opinion and summaries, Carroll v. Trump, No. 24‑644 (Sept. 8, 2025), via FindLaw and Justia. [30]
- WDTV/AP wire pickup with additional filing details and statements, November 11, 2025. [31]
Bottom Line
If the justices decline review, the Carroll verdicts remain as affirmed and Trump’s civil exposure stays intact. If they take the case, expect a narrowly framed dispute over trial‑level evidence — with outsized political reverberations either way.
Comments
0 commentsJoin the discussion below.