The United States Supreme Court has, for the second time, refused to take up President Donald Trump's appeal against the $83 million (€71 million) defamation judgment awarded to writer E. Jean Carroll. The decision, issued without comment, effectively ends the legal avenue for overturning the verdict in the federal courts.
In July, Trump and the Department of Justice had asked the high court to review the case, arguing that the verdict should be set aside. The Supreme Court's denial marks the latest chapter in a long-running legal battle that has drawn international attention, particularly in Europe, where the case has been closely followed as an example of the #MeToo movement's impact on powerful figures.
A decade-old allegation, a public denial
Carroll, a former journalist and columnist, first went public with her allegations in a 2019 memoir, claiming that Trump sexually assaulted her in a dressing room at a New York department store in the mid-1990s. Trump has repeatedly denied the accusation, stating that he had never met Carroll and that “she's not my type.”
After Trump's public statements calling her a liar and suggesting she fabricated the story to boost book sales, Carroll filed a defamation lawsuit. In a civil trial, a New York jury found Trump liable for sexual assault and defamation, awarding Carroll $5 million in compensatory damages and $83 million in punitive damages.
Last month, Trump paid the $5.6 million (€4.8 million) in compensatory damages, but the larger punitive award remained under appeal. The Supreme Court's refusal to hear the case means the $83 million judgment stands, though further legal challenges are still possible in lower courts.
European perspective on a transatlantic legal saga
For European observers, the case highlights the differing approaches to defamation and sexual misconduct litigation on either side of the Atlantic. In many European countries, defamation laws are stricter, and the burden of proof in civil cases can differ significantly from the US system. The Carroll case has been cited in European legal debates about the balance between free speech and protection against defamation.
The decision also comes amid broader transatlantic tensions over legal and regulatory matters, including EU resistance to US demands on green supply chain rules. While the Supreme Court's ruling is a domestic US matter, it resonates in Europe as a reminder of the legal accountability of public figures.
Trump's legal troubles have been a recurring theme in European media, often framed within the context of his presidency and its impact on transatlantic relations. The Carroll case, in particular, has been seen as a test of whether powerful individuals can be held accountable for alleged misconduct, a question that resonates across European societies.
The Supreme Court's decision not to hear the appeal is the second such refusal, following an earlier denial in a related case. The court did not provide any reasoning, which is typical for such denials.
Carroll's legal team has welcomed the decision, stating that it brings a measure of closure to a long and painful ordeal. Trump's representatives have indicated that they may pursue other legal avenues, but the high court's refusal significantly narrows his options.
As the legal saga continues, the case remains a touchstone for discussions about sexual violence, defamation, and the rule of law—not just in the United States, but also in Europe, where similar debates are ongoing. The outcome may influence how European courts and legislatures approach these issues in the future.
