238

Move follows supreme court refusal to hear Trump’s appeal of civil case verdict in sexual abuse and defamation case

The New York journalist E Jean Carroll asked a judge on Tuesday to mandate that Donald Trump pay her the $5m she is owed from a jury verdict that found the US president liable for sexually abusing her in the 1990s and defaming her after she publicly described in 2019 being attacked by him in a city department store.

Lawyers for Carroll filed papers in a federal court in Manhattan one day after the US supreme court refused to hear Trump’s appeal of the civil case verdict in 2023.

The author and advice columnist argues in the filing that Trump is unjustly trying to delay even further releasing the funds to her, after he has made repeated challenges to the civil jury’s decision.

top 10 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] HootinNHollerin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 2 hours ago

Why the fuck does she have to ask

[-] mkwt@lemmy.world 3 points 10 minutes ago

She's asking the lower appeals court to speed up the process of finalizing the appeal judgement in her favor.

When a circuit appeals court makes a decision, that decision doesn't become final until a separate piece of paper called the "mandate" is issued.

If she didn't make this request the mandate would be issued anyway within a certain time frame, like 30 days or so. She just wants it to happen faster.

It sounds like Trump is thinking about annoying the supreme court with a motion to reconsider. If he does that, he would also file a counter motion in the circuit court to delay the mandate issuance.

[-] santa@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 hour ago

Should receive plus interest!

[-] ape_arms@lemmy.world 11 points 3 hours ago

If Sandy Hook families have not received anything from Alex fatfuck Jones yet, this woman will never see a dime.

[-] Mycatiskai@lemmy.ca 41 points 5 hours ago

For a guy that has gained billions from bilking his donors with crypto schemes since taking office, he is a penny miser. Just pay the money and be done with it.

It's no surprise though, he was one of 26 wealthy people who cashed in a $1.11 cheque, one of 13 wealthy people to cash in a 64 cent cheque and one of two people to cash a 13 cent cheque back when Spy magazine ran a prank to see how penny pinching rich people were.

[-] 9point6@lemmy.world 7 points 2 hours ago

Hahahaha, that last part is new on me and incredible! Thanks for sharing

[-] Nusm@peachpie.theatl.social 40 points 5 hours ago

Trump: “The new ballroom will cost $500 million….. what?…. it will cost $505 million.”

[-] jumjummy@lemmy.world 4 points 1 hour ago

Even if that happened and the $505M was allocated, he STILL wouldn’t pay

[-] lukaro@lemmy.zip 21 points 5 hours ago

I so wish she was trying to get her settlement from his estate.

[-] mkwt@lemmy.world 15 points 5 hours ago

The money should be held by the court in an appeal bond. Hopefully she doesn't have to try to extract it from Trump directly.

this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2026
238 points (100.0% liked)

politics

30239 readers
2108 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS