The court’s brief order closes off an unusually rare request for reconsideration and preserves the civil verdict in Carroll’s favor. The decision does not resolve Trump’s separate, much larger defamation judgment owed to Carroll.
The U.S. Supreme Court rejected Donald Trump’s effort to avoid a $5.6 million payment owed to E. Jean Carroll, leaving his liability in the civil case in place. The court denied Trump’s request to reconsider its earlier refusal to hear his challenge, a result that keeps the 2023 jury verdict for Carroll intact.
The Aug. 17 action is brief but consequential: Trump has exhausted this route for contesting the verdict. It also draws attention back to the distinction between this case and the separate, far larger defamation award Carroll won against him.
A rare second request fails
Trump had already asked the Supreme Court to take up his appeal from the verdict in Carroll’s lawsuit. The justices declined to do so in June, allowing the lower-court ruling to stand.
He then filed a petition for rehearing, asking the court to revisit that decision. On Aug. 17, the court denied that request. Its docket in Trump v. Carroll records the result simply: “Petition DENIED.”
That terse wording is normal. The Supreme Court generally does not explain why it refuses to hear a case or why it declines a request to reconsider such a refusal.
Rehearing requests at the Supreme Court face a steep climb. According to SCOTUSblog, the justices had not granted a petition to reconsider a denial of review since 2018. Trump’s request therefore sought an exceptional form of relief, rather than a routine next step in an appeal.
What the $5.6 million covers
The dispute stems from a lawsuit Carroll filed in federal court in New York in 2022. Carroll, a writer and former advice columnist, alleged that Trump sexually assaulted her in a Manhattan department-store dressing room in 1996 and later defamed her when he publicly denied her account.
Trump denied Carroll’s allegation. In May 2023, a federal jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation, awarding Carroll $5 million. With interest and the progression of the judgment, the amount cited in the current dispute is approximately $5.6 million.
The jury did not find Trump liable for rape under the specific New York-law definition submitted to it. The verdict nonetheless found him liable for sexual abuse and for defaming Carroll through his denials.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit later upheld the verdict. The Supreme Court’s refusal to intervene means that appellate outcome remains in force.
Trump challenged evidence at trial
Trump’s Supreme Court petition focused on evidence the trial judge allowed jurors to hear. His lawyers argued that Carroll’s side should not have been permitted to introduce testimony from two other women who accused Trump of sexual misconduct.
He also challenged the use of the 2005 Access Hollywood recording, in which Trump was heard making remarks about grabbing women without their consent. Trump’s position was that the evidence was unfairly prejudicial and affected the verdict.
Carroll’s legal team argued that the evidence was properly admitted and that the judgment should remain undisturbed. Her lawyers also maintained that the broader evidence supporting Carroll’s account was strong enough that the challenged material did not warrant a new trial.
By declining review and then denying rehearing, the Supreme Court did not endorse either side’s legal arguments in a written opinion. It left the lower courts’ handling of those questions intact.
This is not the $83.3 million case
The $5.6 million obligation should not be confused with Carroll’s second civil verdict against Trump. In January 2024, another federal jury awarded Carroll $83.3 million in a separate defamation case involving statements Trump made about her in 2019.
That case concerned a different set of remarks, a different trial and a substantially larger damages award. Trump has challenged that judgment as well, and its legal path is separate from the Supreme Court’s latest action in the $5 million verdict case.
The two cases are often grouped together because they involve the same parties and related public denials. Legally, however, they rest on distinct claims and verdicts. The Aug. 17 denial concerns the earlier verdict that arose from Carroll’s 2022 lawsuit.
- Earlier case: $5 million jury award in 2023, now described as about $5.6 million with interest.
- Separate case: $83.3 million jury award in 2024 over a different set of defamatory statements.
- Latest Supreme Court action: denial of Trump’s rehearing request in the earlier case.
The ruling’s practical effect
For Carroll, the court’s action removes the remaining Supreme Court avenue Trump was pursuing in this particular case. The verdict remains enforceable, subject to the ordinary procedures that govern payment and judgment collection.
For Trump, the result is a legal loss without a new substantive Supreme Court ruling. The justices did not revisit the evidence, the jury instructions or the lower court’s analysis; they declined to reopen the matter.
The outcome also illustrates a limit often overlooked in high-profile litigation. Filing at the Supreme Court does not guarantee a full appeal. The court hears only a small share of the petitions it receives, and a denied petition does not mean the justices have ruled on every factual dispute behind the case.
What remains unresolved
The court’s order ends this rehearing effort, but it does not settle every dispute between Trump and Carroll. The separate $83.3 million defamation judgment remains the larger financial and legal issue between them.
It also does not create a broad new precedent, because the Supreme Court issued no opinion explaining its decision. The immediate takeaway is narrower: the judgment tied to the 2023 verdict stands, and Trump remains responsible for the approximately $5.6 million payment to Carroll.
That distinction matters in a case that has generated years of litigation and intense political attention. The latest order is procedurally short, but its effect is direct: the Supreme Court has declined again to disturb Carroll’s earlier win.
Leave a Reply