2025-09-08 18:33
publication
2025-09-08 18:33
On Monday, the Federal Court of Appeal rejected the request of US President Donald Trump to set aside the judgment of the sworn bench, which granted the writer E. Jean Carroll $ 83.3 million compensation for defamation. Trump publicly challenged her accusation of sexual assault, which was to occur around 1996.
The Court of Appeal of the Second District of the United States in Manhattan unanimously found that Trump's arguments were unfounded, and the judgment of January 2024 does not require repeal, despite the fact that the president referred to alleged immunity, resulting from the office of the head of the head of state.
“Compensation, belonged to the jury, was correct in the light of extraordinary and glaring facts in this case,” said a three -person judge panel.
This is another loser of Trump in a dispute with Carroll. Already, on June 13, 2024, the same court of appeal upheld a separate judgment of May 2023, granting a writer $ 5 million for similar defamation and assault on sexual background, although without finding rape.
According to Reuters, Carroll, today 81-year-old was the columnist of the magazine “Elle”, says that Trump sexually attacked her around 1996 at the Bergdorf Goodman department store in Manhattan. For the first time, she made her accusations public in 2019. Trump strongly denied them, confessing with a journalist that Carroll “is not his type” and that she washed the whole story to promote her book “What do we need men for?” The Republican basically repeated his allegations in October 2022 on the Truth Social platform. At that time, it resulted in imposing a penalty of $ 5 million on Trump.
In the case of a newer judgment, the amount of $ 83.3 million includes $ 18.3 million as compensation for Carroll moral and image losses and $ 65 million as compensation.
In the appeal, Trump argued that the decision of the US Supreme Court of July 2024, which granted former presidents to a wide criminal immunity for actions taken during the office, should also protect him in this civilian case. He argued that the statements of 2019 were part of his activity as the incumbent president, and taking him the immunity would be a dangerous precedent and a threat to the independence of the executive.
The mistake of the district judge Lewis Kaplan, leading both processes, was – in Trump's opinion – removal of his testimony. The Republican argued that when speaking about Carroll, “he just wanted to defend himself, his family and, to be honest, the office of the president.”
From New York Andrzej Dobrowolski (PAP)
Ad/ Szm/
