Trump is making another bid to stop the release of nearly $5.8 million awarded to writer E. Jean Carroll, asking a federal judge to block payment while the U.S. Supreme Court considers a fresh request tied to his failed appeal. The latest legal maneuver has reignited debate over whether the long-running civil case has reached its legal endpoint or whether another round of appeals could still alter its outcome, even as Carroll’s legal team argues the judgment should be enforced without further delay.
Trump’s Latest Court Strategy Faces Fresh Scrutiny
Trump’s lawyers argued in a New York federal court filing that Carroll should not receive the money currently held in a court-controlled escrow account until the Supreme Court decides whether it will reconsider its refusal to hear his appeal. They contend that releasing the funds now could cause irreparable harm if the high court later agrees to revisit the case, especially because Carroll has previously indicated she intends to donate much of the award. With accumulated interest, the original $5 million judgment has increased to roughly $5.8 million.
The dispute stems from a 2023 civil trial in which a jury found Trump liable for sexually abusing Carroll in the mid-1990s and for defaming her after she publicly described the incident. Trump has consistently denied the allegations, arguing that evidentiary rulings during the trial—including testimony from other women and the admission of the 2005 Access Hollywood recording—unfairly influenced the jury. Those arguments have been rejected by appellate courts, while Carroll’s attorneys maintain that repeated appeals are delaying enforcement of a judgment already affirmed by multiple courts.
Appeals, Escrow Funds and the Bigger Legal Picture
The latest filing follows the Supreme Court’s decision in late June to decline Trump’s initial appeal without explanation, leaving the jury verdict intact. Rather than ending the legal battle, Trump’s legal team has submitted a petition asking the justices to reconsider that refusal—a rarely successful procedure under Supreme Court practice. While such petitions are permitted, they are granted only in exceptional circumstances, making the odds of reversing the court’s earlier decision relatively low.
The $5.8 million judgment represents only one of two major civil cases brought by Carroll against Trump. In a separate defamation lawsuit, another jury awarded Carroll $83.3 million after concluding that Trump’s public statements continued to defame her following the first verdict. That larger judgment is also under appeal, meaning both cases remain legally active despite multiple setbacks for Trump’s legal team. As the courts continue to weigh procedural questions, the litigation remains one of the most consequential civil legal battles involving a sitting U.S. president, illustrating how appeals can extend high-profile disputes long after juries have delivered their verdicts.
For now, Trump’s request places the spotlight back on the federal courts, where judges must decide whether the escrowed funds should remain frozen or finally be released to Carroll. OGM News will continue monitoring developments as the Supreme Court determines whether it will entertain Trump’s latest petition and as related appeals in the separate defamation judgment move forward.
подъем домов кемерово