General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsPay EJean Carroll her $83m you cretin says the Appeal court
https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/08/politics/e-jean-carroll-jury-award-trumpA federal appeals court on Monday upheld a $83.3 million jury award against President Donald Trump for defaming magazine writer E. Jean Carroll in 2019.
The 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals said the jury award was reasonable given the evidence presented at trial.
We hold that the district court did not err in any of the challenged rulings and that the jurys duly rendered damages awards were reasonable in light of the extraordinary and egregious facts of this case, the appeals panel of judges wrote.
The judges also rejected Trumps effort to assert he had presidential immunity since he made the statements while in office
spooky3
(38,874 posts)That she passes away before she collects. Justice delayed is justice denied.
malaise
(297,987 posts)Rec
canetoad
(21,032 posts)Suffer trump.
And good morning malaise
LetMyPeopleVote
(182,091 posts)Trump recently signaled hell ask the Supreme Court to review his previous appeals court loss in the other Carroll case, where she won $5 million.
Will the right-wing Supreme Court majority rule that rape is fine if the rapist is a president and the president rapist should be allowed to defame his victims? Only time will tell.
— @jimrissmiller.bsky.social 2025-09-08T18:18:54.534Z
Supreme Court is last stand in E. Jean Carroll's legal vindication against Trump www.msnbc.com/deadline-whi...
https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/e-jean-carroll-defamation-trump-loses-83-million-rcna229822
In Mondays ruling, the New York-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit concluded that the five-figure damages were reasonable in light of the extraordinary and egregious facts of this case. The three-judge panel also rejected Trumps arguments that the Supreme Courts immunity ruling saves him and that the district judge who presided over the case made erroneous legal rulings.....
Mondays decision involves the second of the two cases that went to trial, where a jury awarded Carroll $83.3 million for statements Trump made when he was still in office. The panel rejected his argument that the damages were excessive, reasoning that there was ample evidence that Trump was recklessly indifferent to Carrolls health and safety. The panel noted that his statements had a domino effect, as Carroll was subjected to ongoing and prolific harassment as a result of these statements, including a multitude of death threats and other threats of physical injury.
Trumps conduct supports a significant punitive damages award it involved malice and deceit, caused severe emotional injury, and continued over at least a five-year period, the panel concluded.
The three judges on Mondays panel were appointed by former Presidents Joe Biden and Barack Obama. In the $5 million case thats further along on appeal, Trump had asked the full 2nd Circuit to review the case before taking it to the Supreme Court. The full appeals court declined to do so, but two Trump appointees dissented while suggesting that Trump was treated unfairly. In his forthcoming petition to the justices in that case, his lawyers might seek to highlight that dissent to a likeminded Supreme Court majority. Thats all to say that in both Carroll cases, the appeals courts rejections of Trumps arguments might not be the final word.
Kick in to the DU tip jar?
This week we're running a special pop-up mini fund drive. From Monday through Friday we're going ad-free for all registered members, and we're asking you to kick in to the DU tip jar to support the site and keep us financially healthy.
As a bonus, making a contribution will allow you to leave kudos for another DU member, and at the end of the week we'll recognize the DUers who you think make this community great.