What was the verdict in E Jean Carroll vs Donald Trump civil trial?

1. What the jury actually found: liability for sexual abuse and defamation, $5 million award

The jury in the May 2023 civil trial concluded Carroll had not proven the legal definition of rape under New York law (forcible penile penetration) but did find by a preponderance of the evidence that Trump committed a lesser sexual abuse and that he defamed her with statements made in October 2022; jurors awarded Carroll $5 million in compensatory and punitive damages ^{[2] [1] [6]}.

2. How the court explained the rape vs. sexual‑abuse distinction

Judge Lewis Kaplan instructed jurors using New York’s “narrow, technical” statutory definition of rape at the time alleged; because the jury did not find that technical element they instead found liability for a lesser degree of sexual abuse — a distinction emphasized in multiple news and court summaries ^{[2] [1]}. Later rulings by Judge Kaplan and appellate courts have discussed the meaning of Carroll’s allegation and the jury’s findings in broader common-language terms, but the initial verdict used the statutory definitions presented at trial ^[2].

3. Evidence and contested rulings that shaped the trial

Carroll’s case relied on witness testimony, a photo, the 2005 “Access Hollywood” recording, testimony from two other women who had made allegations against Trump, and Trump’s deposition; Trump’s team has repeatedly argued on appeal that the trial judge improperly admitted “propensity” evidence and the Access Hollywood tape, which they say prejudiced the jury ^{[2] [7] [8]}. Appeals courts have evaluated those claims and, in the main, affirmed that the district judge’s evidentiary choices fell within permissible bounds ^{[6] [7]}.

4. Appellate outcome and continued litigation: upheld, then Supreme Court petition

A three‑judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the $5 million judgment, finding any claimed evidentiary errors did not affect Trump’s substantial rights; the panel declined to rehear the case en banc and the appeals court’s decision has been reported as upholding the jury award ^{[6] [8]}. In November 2025, Trump asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review and overturn the $5 million verdict, renewing arguments that the trial was tainted by improper evidentiary rulings ^{[3] [8] [5]}.

5. Wider consequences and related judgments

Reporting and court documents tie the $5 million verdict to other proceedings: a separate jury later awarded Carroll $83.3 million in a related defamation case tied to the same underlying allegations, and some filings suggest overturning the $5 million judgment could have implications for that larger award ^{[4] [5] [9]}. The interplay between the two trials, and strategic appellate arguments about what evidence was admissible, form the core of continued litigation strategy on both sides ^[5].

6. Competing narratives and hidden agendas to watch

Trump’s petition frames Carroll’s claims as “politically motivated” and faults Judge Kaplan’s rulings for allowing “highly inflammatory propensity evidence,” reflecting an agenda to portray the trial as unfair ^[5]. Carroll’s camp and several courts have characterized the evidence and award as legitimate and supported by the record; appellate courts have so far sided with that view, noting the jury’s damages awards were “fair and reasonable” ^{[6] [5]}. Readers should note these opposing framings: defense filings stress procedural error and prejudice, while Carroll’s supporters and the courts emphasize the substance of the evidence and the jury’s findings ^{[7] [6]}.

7. Limitations in available reporting and what is not found here

Available sources do not mention any Supreme Court ruling on Trump’s November 2025 petition (the filing itself is reported), nor do these sources provide new trial transcripts beyond the summaries and appellate opinions cited; detailed jury deliberation notes and sealed materials are not included in the public record excerpts referenced here ^{[3] [6]}. If you want primary documents (full district-court opinions, the Supreme Court petition, or the Second Circuit opinion), the cited articles and legal repositories like Justia provide direct access cited above ^{[6] [3]}.

Summary takeaway: Multiple news outlets and the Second Circuit describe a May 2023 jury verdict finding Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation and awarding Carroll $5 million; that verdict has been affirmed on appeal and is now being challenged at the Supreme Court level, with both sides framing the stakes in sharply different legal and political terms ^{[1] [6] [3]}.