What was the outcome of the lawsuits filed by former Miss Universe contestants against Donald Trump?

Executive Summary: The core legal outcomes tied to lawsuits involving former Miss Universe/Miss USA contestants and Donald Trump resolved primarily against the contestants in the well-documented Sheena Monnin defamation case and involved a separate, unrelated settlement between Trump and Univision over broadcast rights. Sheena Monnin was ordered to pay $5 million after arbitrators and a federal judge found her public claims that the Miss USA pageant was rigged caused the Miss Universe Organization to lose sponsorship revenue; that judgment was reported in 2013 ^{[1] [2]}. Separately, Trump and Univision settled a $500 million suit in 2016 over Univision dropping the telecasts after Trump’s remarks about Mexican immigrants; settlement terms were undisclosed ^{[3] [4]}. These rulings and settlements address distinct disputes: a contestant’s defamation finding and a broadcaster’s commercial lawsuit.

1. Why the Sheena Monnin decision mattered for pageant credibility and legal precedent: The Monnin case reached arbitration and federal court after Monnin, a former Miss Pennsylvania USA, publicly accused the Miss USA pageant of being “rigged,” then resigned from her state title. An arbitrator found her statements caused measurable harm—specifically a lost $5 million sponsorship—and ordered Monnin to pay that amount; a federal judge upheld the arbitration award in 2013 ^{[1] [2]}. This ruling established that public allegations by a contestant can carry significant legal and financial consequences, and it underscored the strength of arbitration clauses and defamation claims in disputes involving pageant organizations. Reporting on this case centered on evidentiary findings by an accounting firm and the arbitrator’s assessment that Monnin’s claims were not substantiated by the contest’s scoring process ^[2]. The upshot: adjudicators sided with the Organization on both factual and damages determinations.

2. What the Trump–Univision settlement resolved and what remained confidential: In an entirely separate legal track, Univision sued Trump for $500 million after the network dropped Miss USA and Miss Universe broadcasts in response to Trump’s 2015 remarks about Mexican immigrants; Trump countersued. The parties reached a settlement in February 2016, and the publicly available accounts emphasize that the deal’s terms were not disclosed ^{[3] [4]}. That settlement settled commercial and contractual disputes between a media conglomerate and the pageant owner rather than resolving contestant claims about rigging or defamation. Media coverage framed the settlement as a pragmatic end to multimillion-dollar litigation ahead of the 2016 presidential campaign, with neither side releasing detailed financial or injunctive terms.

3. How these outcomes differ and why conflation is common but incorrect: The Monnin judgment and the Univision settlement are frequently conflated because both involve Miss USA/Miss Universe and Donald Trump, but they addressed different legal claims, plaintiffs, and remedies. Monnin’s case was a defamation and damages award to the Miss Universe Organization, whereas Univision’s suit was a breach-of-contract and commercial damages dispute resolved confidentially. The Monnin decision produced a published ruling and an enforced $5 million award documented in 2013 reporting, while the Univision matter resulted in an undisclosed settlement reported in 2016 ^{[1] [3]}. Distinguishing the two prevents misunderstanding who sued whom, what legal theories applied, and what remedies were ordered or agreed.

4. What remains unclear or omitted in public accounts and why that matters for interpretation: Public reporting leaves open several details: the exact monetary terms of the Trump–Univision settlement were not disclosed, and later private settlements or negotiations between Monnin and the Organization were reported without full documentation ^{[3] [5]}. Confidential settlements and partial public records make it difficult to assess the full financial impact and any non-monetary conditions such as confidentiality clauses or non-disparagement obligations. Where arbitration and settlement are used, much of the factual record stays private, which can skew public understanding toward the parts that are litigated publicly—typically the most newsworthy judgments—while obscuring negotiated outcomes that may alter incentives or behavior.

5. The broader context and takeaways for questioners comparing contestant lawsuits to other litigation involving Trump: The Monnin ruling illustrates how courts and arbitrators can impose substantial damages for defamatory statements by contestants; the Univision settlement shows how broadcasters may pursue large contractual claims against pageant owners. Both outcomes demonstrate that legal exposure from pageant-related disputes can be significant, but they are not uniformly plaintiff-friendly: outcomes depend on the legal theory, proof of damages, arbitration agreements, and strategic settlement choices. Readers should treat the $5 million judgment as a clear, adjudicated outcome in a defamation arbitration upheld by a court ^{[1] [2]}, while regarding the $500 million Univision case as a high-profile commercial dispute that ended in a confidential settlement ^{[3] [4]}.