Ruling's Consequences from the $83.3 million Judgement against Donald Trump.
In a significant legal development, the defamation lawsuit between E. Jean Carroll and former President Donald Trump has seen several key rulings favouring Carroll. The most recent of these rulings, decided in January 2024, ordered Trump to pay $83.3 million in damages for defamatory statements made during his presidency.
The jury reached a decision in less than three hours, awarding Carroll $18.3 million in compensatory damages and a staggering $65 million in punitive damages. This verdict sends a powerful message that a jury did not side with Trump regarding Democratic prosecutors, judges, and the Biden administration.
However, Trump's legal team is appealing the verdict, arguing that presidential immunity should shield him from liability. The Justice Department attempted to intervene, asserting that some of Trump’s allegedly defamatory statements were made in his official capacity and the federal government should defend him. This has so far been rejected by the appeals court.
The pattern of judicial frustration with Trump's legal team is consistent with previous trials. During Friday's closing arguments, Judge Lewis Kaplan admonished Trump's attorney and even warned of potential time in custody for the attorney. This is not the first time Trump's legal team has faced such criticism.
In a notable incident during the trial, Trump walked out of the courtroom during Carroll's attorney's closing argument. Despite this, Trump did not have the opportunity to address the media outside the courtroom.
The punitive damages are intended as a substantial penalty to deter Trump's ongoing attacks. If upheld, the verdict will be influential for Trump’s legal exposure and for the presidential immunity doctrine.
It is uncertain whether Carroll will receive the money soon due to Trump's intention to appeal the verdict. Last year, Trump set aside $5.5 million in a court-controlled account as a step toward satisfying a previous judgment. Access to these funds is contingent on the resolution of all appeals, possibly including an appeal to the US Supreme Court.
The defamation lawsuit is a rebuke of Trump’s defamatory statements and denial of rape allegations made by Carroll. The verdict tests the limits of presidential immunity, especially regarding statements made during official duties while Trump was president. If the courts reject Trump's immunity claim, it could set a precedent for holding presidents personally liable for defamatory statements made even while in office.
The outcome of this appeal will embolden other plaintiffs bringing lawsuits tied to Trump’s conduct and public statements during his presidency. A final ruling against Trump could reinforce efforts to hold him accountable in other legal contexts tied to his conduct, while a successful immunity claim could narrow future liabilities for sitting and former presidents.
As Trump faces potential criminal cases later this year, Judge Kaplan's behavior may persist, indicating a continued scrutiny of Trump's legal team and their actions. The defamation and sexual abuse verdicts against Trump have been largely upheld by appellate courts, with the more massive $83 million damages still under appeal based on presidential immunity claims.
In light of the defamation lawsuit, the verdict against former President Donald Trump send a clear message that politics, war-and-conflicts, and general news, including his statements during his presidency, are not shielded from legal accountability. The ongoing appeal of this verdict, which centers on presidential immunity, will have far-reaching implications for the future liabilities of both sitting and former presidents in similar cases.
If the appeal is unsuccessful, this case could set a precedent for holding presidents personally liable for defamatory statements, adding another layer to the ongoing scrutiny of Trump's legal team and actions.
