How many women have accused Trump of sexual assault?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Different news outlets and compilations report different totals because they count different things: established tallies range from the mid‑teens to the high‑20s in many mainstream lists, with some outlets and commentators reporting higher figures when they include a broader set of allegations or more recent claims (examples: PBS counted 16 women, ABC 18, multiple outlets cited “at least 25–27”), while a 2024 essay and some coverage cite as many as 69 when expanding definitions and including more peripheral claims [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]. The most commonly reported, conservative figure across reputable summaries is roughly 25–27 women who have publicly accused Donald Trump of sexual assault or misconduct [4] [7] [8] [5].
1. A snapshot of commonly cited totals
Major news compilations published since 2016 most often land in the mid‑20s: Business Insider and a range of outlets list “at least 26” women who accused Trump of sexual misconduct, Vice and The Independent used the same 26‑figure in multiple accounts, and some outlets published updated lists counting roughly 27 after more recent allegations surfaced [4] [8] [7] [9] [5]. Other reputable outlets reported lower but still substantial counts: PBS’s 2019 recap counted 16 women alleging sexual assault (including at least one that met a legal rape definition), ABC News compiled at least 18 accusers in 2020, and Wikipedia’s entry (which aggregates reporting) noted “at least 25” accusers [1] [2] [3].
2. Why the totals differ — definitions and scope matter
The variance in numbers is driven by how sources define and categorize allegations: some lists count only accusations that allege forcible assault or rape, others include a broader set of claims described as “sexual misconduct,” “harassment,” or non‑consensual kissing and groping, and still others add corroborated third‑party confirmations or private settlements into totals, producing higher counts [1] [3] [10]. Journalistic projects that cast a wide net — including decades of reported episodes, settlements, pageant‑era stories, and instances where witnesses corroborated parts of accounts — naturally produce larger enumerations than tallies that restrict themselves to sworn criminal allegations or to incidents litigated in court [10] [1].
3. The effect of time and new allegations
The list has expanded episodically: the release of the 2005 Access Hollywood tape in 2016 prompted multiple women to come forward, and subsequent years brought new public allegations and at least one high‑profile civil jury finding, so counts published earlier in the controversy (e.g., 2019) are lower than some later tallies [11] [1] [7]. For instance, E. Jean Carroll’s civil lawsuits resulted in a jury finding that led several outlets to reframe how many women had accused Trump and which allegations had legal consequences, a development emphasized in late‑2022 and reported in follow‑up coverage [7].
4. Legal outcomes and credibility are not identical to counts
A numerical total of accusers does not indicate uniform legal findings: most public accusations did not lead to criminal charges, some ended in withdrawn suits or settlements, and only a small number resulted in civil trials or jury determinations — the media record distinguishes between public allegations, civil litigation, settlements, and court verdicts [10] [7] [1]. Coverage repeatedly notes that Trump has denied all the allegations and that his campaign and spokespeople have issued blanket denials, which is a factor in evaluating the public record but does not by itself resolve disputed claims [4] [5].
5. What reliable reporting can — and cannot — tell readers
Reliable reporting can document who has made public accusations, when those accusations were published or litigated, and whether courts or settlements addressed particular claims; that reporting shows a cluster of mid‑20s counts in mainstream compilations and higher counts in pieces that broaden the definition of misconduct [4] [8] [6] [10]. What existing sources cannot do without further primary evidence is declare a single definitive number that settles every dispute: totals change depending on inclusion criteria, timing, verification thresholds, and whether one counts every allegation, corroborated claim, or legal finding — readers should treat any single headline number as shorthand for a set of editorial choices made by the outlet compiling the list [3] [10] [1].