Trump loses bid to toss $83M defamation judgment in favor of E. Jean Carroll

A federal appeals court in New York on Monday upheld a civil judgment ordering President Trump to pay $83.3 million to former magazine columnist E. Jean Carroll over defamation claims.

A panel of judges from the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Mr. Trump’s challenges related to trial proceedings, the size of the award to Ms. Carroll and presidential immunity claims stemming from a landmark Supreme Court ruling.

“We conclude that Trump has failed to identify any grounds that would warrant reconsidering our prior holding on presidential immunity. We also conclude that the district court did not err in any of the challenged rulings and that the jury’s damages awards are fair and reasonable,” the judges wrote.

Ms. Carroll wrote a bombshell article in 2019 that accused Mr. Trump of sexually assaulting her in the Bergdorf Goodman department store in Manhattan in the 1990s.

Mr. Trump strenuously denies the incident occurred.

A jury awarded Ms. Carroll $5 million in damages in 2023 after it found Mr. Trump liable for sexually abusing her. An appeals court upheld that decision, though Mr. Trump’s lawyers recently announced they are seeking redress from the Supreme Court.

In a separate trial, Ms. Carroll was awarded another $83.3 million in damages on defamation claims related to comments Mr. Trump made in response to her article.

Monday’s decision to uphold that judgment is a setback for Mr. Trump after he had notched an appeals court victory last month.

A panel of judges tossed a roughly $500 million fine against Mr. Trump in a civil case brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James, who accused his business of inflating property value and deceiving banks.

The judges said Ms. James acted lawfully in bringing the case, but that the penalty went too far.

In the Carroll decision, the appeals panel recounted Ms. Carroll’s career difficulties following the alleged attack and found the jury’s award comported with precedent and law.

“Trump argues that the jury’s punitive damages award of $65 million was grossly excessive under constitutional and federal common law principles,” the judges wrote. “Given the unique and egregious facts of this case, we conclude that the punitive damages award did not exceed the bounds of reasonableness under either standard.”