Trump Appeals $83.3 Million Defamation Verdict

United States President Donald Trump and the Department of Justice have separately asked the Supreme Court to set aside an $83.3 million defamation judgment awarded to writer E. Jean Carroll. The petitions were filed this week and target the civil penalty imposed on Trump.

In their filings, Trump and federal lawyers argue that the statements at issue were made within the scope of Trump’s federal office. On that basis, they are urging the Court to vacate the judgment and reverse the earlier appellate outcome.

Immunity arguments tied to official acts

Trump’s counsel is seeking to extend a 2024 Supreme Court ruling—Trump v. United States—into the civil arena. That decision recognized presumptive immunity for official acts, and Trump’s petition argues the same approach should apply to defamation claims arising from statements made while he was president.

The Department of Justice is advancing a related but distinct legal path by invoking the Westfall Act. Federal lawyers argue the statute, which provides immunity to federal employees for actions taken within the scope of their employment, should prevent a sitting president from facing personal liability for conduct performed while in office.

2nd Circuit rejection and the new Supreme Court push The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected these immunity-based arguments in September 2024. The appellate court held that the defamation claims did not fall within protections tied to presidential duties, leaving the $83.3 million judgment in place.

The current Supreme Court filings directly challenge that September 2024 decision. The petitions ask the justices to revisit whether the legal shield argued for in the criminal context can also block civil litigation that seeks money damages.

Why the case matters and what remains uncertain

The appeal sets up a significant test of whether immunity protections could expand beyond criminal prosecution into civil cases involving a president’s public statements. At its core is the question of how courts define “official acts” and how far employment-scope protections can reach for the presidency.

The Supreme Court has not indicated whether it will take up the case. Until the Court decides whether to grant a hearing, the status of the petitions—and the future of the $83.3 million defamation judgment—remains uncertain.