Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

News

Appeals Court Denies Trump Request to Delay E. Jean Carroll Defamation Trial

An appeals court has rejected former President Donald Trump’s latest attempt to delay a defamation trial that is set to begin on Jan. 16, 2024.

“Appellant moves to stay the issuance of the mandate and to stay district court proceedings during the pendency of remaining appellate proceedings … it is hereby ordered that the motions are denied,” the short Dec. 28 order reads.

Writer E. Jean Carroll made public allegations in 2019 that Donald Trump sexually assaulted her in a department store in the mid-1990s, leading to his public denial while in office and three civil lawsuits.

In 2019, Ms. Carroll brought a defamation case against President Trump that now will soon be heading to trial—only to determine damages, as President Trump was already found guilty in a related case.

Ms. Carroll brought a separate case against President Trump when New York state lifted the statute of limitations for sexual offense cases for one year and won $5 million in damages in May. The former president countersued, but the case was dismissed.

President Trump made several other bids to dismiss or delay the case; the latest was dismissed by the 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in mid-December. Defense attorneys for President Trump indicated they would seek immediate review from the Supreme Court and asked the appeals court to pause the case, and thus the trial, pending appeal.

The issue at hand was related to presidential immunity—a defense President Trump has raised in other ongoing cases against him, including a criminal case in federal appeals court.

U.S. District Court Judge Lewis Kaplan has already chastised the defense multiple times for attempts to delay the trial, which will now proceed in January even while President Trump seeks immediate review from the Supreme Court, which could later stall the case.

Damages Only

Judge Kaplan ruled that the facts are the same in both of the civil cases Ms. Carroll brought against President Trump, and he issued a summary judgment in the defamation case after a jury found President Trump guilty of “sexual battery” against Ms. Carroll in her second case.

One of the expert witnesses in the second case presented a formula she used to calculate damages President Trump owed to Ms. Carroll, which took into account the statements he made referencing her.

Afterward, Ms. Carroll amended her defamation case to ask for $10 million in compensatory damages.

President Trump maintains that he has done nothing wrong and stands by his 2019 statements in which he denied knowing her or ever touching her.

Presidential Immunity

The appeals court threw out President Trump’s latest motion to dismiss based on presidential immunity after determining he had waived that immunity by countersuing Ms. Carroll.

During an appeals hearing, judges raised the question of whether presidential immunity was waivable at all.

Defense attorneys argued it couldn’t be waived and that a president could litigate civil cases if he wished, without waiving his immunity. Plaintiffs argued that for the judiciary to rule that presidents couldn’t waive their immunity would be a breach of the separation of powers.

Judges pointed out that, as plaintiffs previously argued, President Trump hadn’t litigated the case as if he had absolute immunity that wasn’t waivable.

He initially raised other defenses when Ms. Carroll sued in 2019—while he was still president of the United States—including the anti-SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) defense first. The motion to dismiss based on presidential immunity only came years later.

Attorneys for President Trump have already stated that they would appeal the ruling in the second case brought by Ms. Carroll.

READ 30 COMMENTS
  • j says:

    NY just does not realize it Yet…..But NY and Chicago as far as a Great City are Over….there another Detroit….that never come back to what they were

  • Trish says:

    If she were merely a gold digger she would have filed a case way before 2016. She’s what’s known as a clout-chaser and being egged on by the TDS idiots.

  • Guest says:

    It is stunning to me still how she and her attorneys presented ZER0 evidence and could not even prove he was ever at that department store or even knew her and the jury ruled in her favor. Despicable. He should be able to sue her for defamation because he did not do anything to her. ZERO evidence.

  • TOP STORIES

    News

    The Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) is hiring illegal border crossers with Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals status and equipping them with guns to...

    News

    Former President Trump would handily win the presidential election if it were held today – thanks in part to a stunning boost in support...

    News

    The misconduct hearings on efforts to oust Fulton County DA Fani Willis from the Trump RICO case have come to a close. Both sides...

    News

    Former President Donald Trump has defeated former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley in the Missouri Republican caucus, according to The Associated Press. In addition to...

    >