Supreme Court Rejects Trump's Appeal in Carroll Case
The Supreme Court on Monday rejected President Trump's request for a second look at a $5 million civil verdict in favor of writer E. Jean Carroll. The court offered no explanation, which is standard for such orders.
- $5.62 million — the total Carroll received, including accrued interest.
- A 2023 Manhattan jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation.
- Rehearing petitions are rarely filed and almost never granted by the court.
- $83.3 million — a separate Carroll judgment, still under Supreme Court review.
Why it matters: Monday's denial effectively closes the $5 million case. Trump had sought to reclaim the funds already paid to Carroll, arguing the June denial was premature while a rehearing petition was pending.
- The denial makes Trump's pending clawback motion moot, keeping those funds under Carroll's control.
How 61 sources split on this story
Where they split: The central dispute going forward is whether Trump can claim presidential immunity for his 2019 statements about Carroll — the legal question at the heart of the $83.3 million case.
Center coverage, 27 sources: The center focuses on the procedural mechanics — the rarity of rehearing grants, the immunity argument Trump's lawyers failed to raise in time, and what legal questions remain live in the larger case.
Left coverage, 19 sources: The left frames the ruling as a firm, expected rebuke that closes a chapter on accountability, while noting Carroll's attorney had urged a verdict large enough to make Trump stop defaming her client — which he has not.
What’s next: The Supreme Court will decide whether to take the $83.3 million case, likely no sooner than fall.
- Carroll's legal team will file written arguments urging the court to reject that petition.
- Will the Supreme Court agree to hear the $83.3 million defamation case, and will it apply its presidential immunity doctrine to Trump's 2019 statements?
- If the court takes the larger case, could a ruling affect how Trump's 2022 statements — the basis of the $5 million verdict — are treated in any future proceedings?












































