Trump Final Appeal Rejected in E Jean Carroll Case
🤖 AI Generated ImageThe Supreme Court has rejected Donald Trump’s final bid to overturn the civil verdict that found he sexually abused and defamed writer E Jean Carroll.
The justices declined to hear Trump’s appeal in the case, leaving in place the $5 million judgment awarded to Carroll by a New York jury in 2023.
The Supreme Court’s docket for Donald J. Trump v. E. Jean Carroll shows the petition was denied on June 29, 2026.
Supreme Court Rejects Trump Appeal
The rejection ends Trump’s attempt to have the nation’s highest court review the first Carroll civil verdict.
The Supreme Court did not give a reason for refusing the case, which is standard when the justices deny review.
Trump had asked the court to examine whether the trial was unfair because jurors were allowed to hear evidence he argued should not have been admitted.
A federal appeals court had already upheld the jury’s verdict and rejected the argument that a new trial was needed.
With the Supreme Court refusing to intervene, the lower-court judgment remains in force.
📰 Read Also: Supreme Court Allows Late-Arriving Mail Ballots
Carroll Verdict Now Stands
The 2023 jury found Trump liable for sexually abusing Carroll in the 1990s and defaming her in 2022 after she repeated her allegation publicly.
The jury awarded Carroll $5 million in damages.
It did not find Trump liable for rape under New York’s penal-law definition.
That distinction has remained central to accurate reporting of the case.
Carroll’s lawyer, Roberta Kaplan, said the Supreme Court’s decision affirmed the jury’s verdict and ended Trump’s effort to avoid accountability in that case.
Trump continued to deny wrongdoing after the Supreme Court decision and described the case as political.
📰 Read Also: Craig Williams Admits Election Betting Offence
Evidence Fight Drove Final Appeal
Trump’s Supreme Court petition focused on evidence admitted at trial.
His lawyers challenged the use of the 2005 Access Hollywood recording and other testimony the trial judge allowed jurors to consider.
Trump argued that the material unfairly shaped how the jury viewed him.
The Second Circuit disagreed when it upheld the verdict.
The appeals court concluded that the trial court had not committed reversible error and that the jury’s damages award could stand.
The Supreme Court’s denial does not write a new opinion on those evidentiary issues.
It simply means the justices will not review the appeals court’s decision.
📰 Read Also: David Steiner Mail Ballot Policy Faces Scrutiny
Separate $83 Million Case Still Matters
The rejected appeal concerns the $5 million verdict from Carroll’s 2023 civil case.
It does not erase the separate defamation judgment involving Trump’s earlier public denials.
In that separate case, another jury ordered Trump to pay Carroll $83.3 million after finding he defamed her through statements made in 2019.
That case has followed a different appeals track.
The Supreme Court decision on the $5 million verdict still carries major legal weight because it closes Trump’s last route to overturning the first jury finding.
The political impact is also clear.
A civil jury’s finding against a sitting president now survives federal appeal and Supreme Court review refusal.
For Carroll, the ruling marks the end of one long legal fight.
For Trump, it leaves the judgment in place while the broader legal and political fallout continues.
TL;DR
- The Supreme Court declined to hear Trump’s appeal in the E Jean Carroll case.
- The decision leaves the $5 million civil judgment in place.
- A 2023 jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation.
- The jury did not find Trump liable for rape under New York’s penal-law definition.
- Trump challenged trial evidence including the Access Hollywood recording.
- The separate $83.3 million defamation judgment remains a separate legal matter.
Sources
Read More
You might also like
Politics & World News Editor
James Mitchell has covered US and UK politics for over a decade, with a focus on elections, foreign policy, and Capitol Hill. He breaks down complex political stories into clear, fast analysis.
