Supreme Court Declines Appeal, Leaving Trump’s $5 Million Sex Abuse Verdict

Supreme Court Action on the $5 Million Verdict

The Supreme Court issued an order on Monday rejecting President Donald Trump’s petition to overturn a lower court’s ruling in the case brought by E. Jean Carroll. As reported by CNBC, the high court provided no explanation for its decision, which is standard practice for such orders. None of the justices, including the three appointed by Trump, registered a public dissent.

The refusal to hear the case finalizes the outcome of the 2023 trial, where a Manhattan federal jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation. The judgment requires the president to pay $5 million to Carroll. The underlying allegations date back to a 1996 incident in the dressing room of a Bergdorf Goodman department store, which Carroll first publicized in a 2019 magazine article.

In the federal court system, the Supreme Court’s decision not to grant a writ of certiorari means the lower court’s ruling remains the final word on the matter. The high court typically receives thousands of petitions each year but chooses to hear only a small fraction, usually focusing on cases that involve conflicting interpretations of federal law among lower courts or significant constitutional questions. By declining this petition, the Court effectively allows the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ judgment to stand, exhausting the legal avenues for the president in this specific litigation.

Legal Arguments and Trial Evidence

Trump’s legal team had sought to challenge the verdict by focusing on the trial judge’s evidentiary rulings. Specifically, they argued that U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan acted improperly by allowing testimony from two other women, Jessica Leeds and Natasha Stoynoff, who also accused Trump of sexual misconduct.

According to NBC News, the defense also contended that the jury should not have been permitted to view the “Access Hollywood” tape. Trump’s lawyers characterized these decisions as an attempt to “maximize political injury to him and profit for herself.” Furthermore, the defense pointed to the fact that Carroll did not report the incident to law enforcement at the time, arguing the lack of witnesses undermined the claims. Under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b), trial judges have discretion to admit evidence of other “crimes, wrongs, or other acts” if they are used to prove a motive, opportunity, intent, or plan, rather than to prove a person’s character.

Carroll’s representatives maintained that the evidence was properly admitted to demonstrate a pattern of conduct. They noted that the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2024 ruling, previously determined that the admission of this evidence was not a deciding factor in the jury’s verdict.

Status of Additional Defamation Claims

While the $5 million judgment is now settled, Trump faces separate legal exposure regarding his statements about Carroll. A different Manhattan jury awarded Carroll $83.3 million in a separate defamation case.

That award, stemming from comments Trump made while serving his first term, remains under appeal. In that ongoing litigation, the president’s legal team is asserting a defense of presidential immunity. Unlike the case rejected by the Supreme Court on Monday, the $83.3 million judgment is still being contested in lower federal appeals courts. The question of presidential immunity—the extent to which a president is shielded from civil liability for acts taken while in office—remains a central, evolving area of constitutional law.

Case	Judgment Amount	Current Status
Sexual Abuse/Defamation (2023)	$5 million	Finalized (Supreme Court rejected appeal)
Defamation (First Term)	$83.3 million	Pending appeal

These legal proceedings continue to highlight the complex intersection of executive privilege and personal liability as the former president navigates multiple overlapping challenges within the federal and state court systems.

Find more reporting in our News section.