Trump asks Supreme Court to overturn $83 million Carroll defamation verdict

President Donald Trump and the Justice Department have filed a fresh petition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to nullify the $83 million jury verdict against him in the defamation suit brought by writer E. Jean Carroll. The request, lodged on Tuesday, targets the damages awarded for statements Trump made while he was in office and raises a novel constitutional question about whether a sitting president can be sued for comments made in the course of his official duties.

The move follows a June defeat when the high court declined to hear Trump’s challenge to an earlier $5 million judgment for sexual‑abuse and defamation findings based on remarks he made after leaving the White House. By contrast, the new appeal seeks to overturn the larger award that a Manhattan jury rendered in January 2024.

Media additions

At stake is not only the financial liability—nearly a hundred million dollars when interest and fees are added—but also the broader legal precedent concerning presidential immunity in civil actions.

Legal strategy: invoking the Westfall Act

The Justice Department’s filing argues that the Westfall Act, a federal law that shields government employees from personal lawsuits for actions taken within the scope of their official responsibilities, should apply to Trump’s 2019 comments denying Carroll’s allegations. If the Court agrees, the United States would be substituted as the defendant, potentially insulating Trump’s personal assets.

“Absent this Court’s intervention, the sitting President is facing nearly a hundred million dollars of personal liability for conduct that was well within the scope of his federal office,”

Federal attorneys, via The Guardian

Trump’s own lawyers contend that the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals erred by “engaged in procedural contortions” and failed to address whether presidential immunity applies at all.

“Because accusations bearing on the president’s fitness for office are unquestionably matters of public concern, presidential statements responding to press questions about such accusations are plainly official,”

Trump’s lawyers, via AOL

They also describe the damages as “grossly excessive” and argue that the case “cries out for this Court’s review in this unprecedented case.”

“This is the first case in our nation’s history in which a court has imposed damages liability on a president for his conduct in office,”

Trump’s lawyers, via The Guardian

Chronology of the Carroll litigation

• 1996 – Carroll alleges Trump sexually assaulted her in a dressing‑room at Bergdorf Goodman.
• 2019 – Carroll publishes a memoir excerpt accusing Trump of rape; Trump dismisses her as “not my type” and claims she fabricated the story to boost sales.
• 2022 – Trump repeats the denial on social media, calling the claim a “hoax” and a “con job.”
• 2023 – A New York jury awards Carroll $5 million for sexual‑abuse and defamation based on Trump’s post‑presidency statements; that judgment has been paid.
• January 2024 – A Manhattan jury awarded her US$83-million in damages in January 2024.
• June 2024 – The Supreme Court refused in June to hear his appeal of another verdict, for US$5-million.
• July 28 2026 – Trump and the Justice Department file the current petition seeking to overturn the $83 million award.

Political and procedural backdrop

The case arrives amid a broader pattern of legal battles involving Trump. The Justice Department has been using its resources to challenge civil judgments that could affect the president’s finances.

Legal scholars note that the Supreme Court’s 2024 decision granting former presidents immunity from criminal prosecution for official actions does not automatically extend to civil suits. The Court has never ruled on whether that immunity covers defamation claims tied to presidential statements, leaving a gray area that both sides hope the justices will clarify.

“The question is straightforward,” Trump's lawyers argue, asserting that statements made in response to media inquiries about personal conduct are official acts.

What to watch next

• Formal docketing of the petition – expected shortly.
• Supreme Court’s scheduling decision – the justices may grant or deny review within weeks, shaping the timeline for any potential hearing.
• Potential impact on other civil cases involving Trump – a ruling could set precedent for immunity claims in related lawsuits.

While Carroll’s legal team has declined comment on the latest filing, the outcome could determine whether the $83 million judgment remains enforceable or is transferred to the federal government, effectively shielding Trump’s personal assets.

For ongoing coverage of the case and its implications for presidential accountability, follow our World section.