Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Status of appeals in the E. Jean Carroll v Donald Trump case
Executive summary
President Trump has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review a $5 million civil verdict that found he sexually abused and defamed writer E. Jean Carroll; the petition was filed on November 10–11, 2025 after the Second Circuit and an earlier panel upheld the underlying judgment (court rulings cited) [1] [2]. Separately, an $83.3 million defamation award against Trump tied to related statements was also affirmed by the Second Circuit in September 2025 and remains the subject of related appellate efforts and bond/collection disputes [3] [4].
1. What Trump asked the Supreme Court to review — the narrow appeal
Trump’s petition to the Supreme Court targets the $5 million 2023 civil judgment that a jury found him liable for sexually abusing and defaming E. Jean Carroll; his lawyers argue the trial judge made a “series of indefensible evidentiary rulings,” especially permitting testimony from other accusers and playing the “Access Hollywood” tape, and they ask the high court to overturn the verdict [1] [5] [6]. News outlets report the petition frames these evidentiary rulings as raising circuit splits and legal questions about propensity evidence and trial procedure that could merit Supreme Court review [7] [8].
2. Where the case has been in the appeals process so far
A Second Circuit panel upheld the original $5 million verdict and rejected Trump’s challenges; Trump sought rehearing en banc and was denied in June 2025 before filing to the Supreme Court in November 2025 [4] [2] [9]. Multiple outlets note the appeals court found no reversible error in the district court’s handling of testimony and evidence, and described the damages in the related defamation case as “reasonable” [3] [7].
3. The $83.3 million defamation judgment — connected but distinct
Separately, a later jury imposed an $83.3 million award for defamation tied to Trump’s repeated post‑trial public attacks on Carroll; the Second Circuit affirmed that larger award in September 2025, calling the conduct “extraordinary and egregious” and rejecting Trump’s challenges — including presidential immunity arguments — in that appeal [3] [4]. Reporting and legal analysts cite the $5 million and $83.3 million matters as distinct judgments from separate proceedings, though a favorable Supreme Court ruling on the $5 million case could influence or undermine the larger award [10].
4. What’s next at the Supreme Court and likelihood of review
There is no automatic right to Supreme Court review; the justices must vote to grant certiorari (four votes required), and news coverage emphasizes uncertainty about whether the Court will take the case — decisions on certiorari usually come months after a petition is filed [5] [1]. Multiple outlets note the legal theory pressed — evidentiary rules and propensity testimony — is the primary vehicle Trump is using to argue for review and to frame a broader circuit split [7] [8].
5. Positions and messaging from both sides
Trump’s legal team frames the appeal as correcting “improper” evidentiary rulings and has described the move as part of opposing what it calls “liberal lawfare,” language reported in press statements [11] [7]. Carroll’s attorneys, including Roberta Kaplan, have publicly said they do not believe Trump can present legal issues meriting Supreme Court review, per press reporting [7] [11]. Outlets also record that Carroll herself has declined comment at times [2] [12].
6. Limits of available reporting and what reporters disagree about
Reporting consistently documents the filings, prior appellate denials, and the separate $83.3 million defamation affirmance [2] [3] [4]. Available sources do not mention a firm Supreme Court docket number or indicate the Court’s timetable for deciding whether to grant review; news outlets uniformly signal that it is unclear if and when certiorari will be granted [5] [1]. Some outlets emphasize the potential political and legal stakes differently — for example, Forbes highlights how a Supreme Court win could jeopardize the larger award, while appellate rulings characterized the trial judge’s conduct as within proper discretion [10] [3].
7. Bottom line for readers
As of the latest reporting, Trump has petitioned the Supreme Court to overturn the $5 million verdict and earlier appellate rehearing requests were denied; the Second Circuit separately affirmed the $83.3 million defamation judgment [2] [3] [4]. Whether the Supreme Court will hear the case remains unresolved in the press coverage; if the justices take it up, their decision could directly affect the legal status of the $5 million finding and indirectly influence the larger defamation award [5] [10].