The Supreme Court denied President Donald Trump’s request to reconsider its refusal to hear his appeal of E. Jean Carroll’s $5 million civil judgment. The August 17 action leaves Carroll’s award undisturbed and ends Trump’s Supreme Court challenge in this case.
Key Facts
- The Court denied Trump’s rehearing petition on August 17, 2026.
- A jury awarded Carroll $5 million after finding Trump civilly liable for sexual abuse and defamation.
- The Court issued no explanatory opinion with the denial.
- A separate Supreme Court matter involving Carroll remains pending.
What the Court did
The justices had declined to hear Trump’s appeal on June 29. Trump then asked them to rehear that decision, which is a request to reconsider an earlier order.
The Court denied rehearing without an explanation. It issued no opinion discussing the lower courts’ reasoning or announcing a new legal rule.
It also does not represent a new finding that Trump sexually abused or defamed Carroll. Those civil findings came from the jury that heard the evidence in 2023.
What the judgment covers
The jury found Trump civilly liable for sexually abusing Carroll and defaming her through a 2022 statement. It awarded Carroll a total of $5 million in compensatory and punitive damages.
The verdict was civil, not criminal. Trump was not convicted of a crime in this case.
The jury did not find that Carroll proved rape under the wording used on the verdict form. It did find that she proved sexual abuse under New York law.
A federal appeals court affirmed the judgment in December 2024. It rejected Trump’s challenges to evidence admitted at trial and concluded that he had not shown grounds for a new trial.
What each side argued
Trump has denied Carroll’s allegations and denied defaming her. He argued that disputed evidentiary rulings improperly affected the trial and warranted Supreme Court review.
His rehearing petition also asked the justices to hold the case for a related Carroll proceeding. Trump argued that the related dispute could affect whether some statements were properly admitted at trial.
Carroll opposed Trump’s original request for Supreme Court review. She argued that the case was an unsuitable vehicle for the questions he presented and that the lower court’s alternative reasoning independently supported the judgment.
The Court’s short orders did not resolve the parties’ competing arguments. They simply declined review and then declined to reconsider that decision.
Practical effect and what comes next
The August 17 denial closes the Supreme Court proceedings over this $5 million judgment. It removes Trump’s remaining request for the justices to reopen the appeal.
The action does not resolve a separate Carroll judgment. Separate petitions connected to that dispute remained pending on the Supreme Court’s docket as of August 20.
That distinction matters because the two judgments arose from different statements and proceedings. The Court’s action in the $5 million case does not predict how it will handle the separate petitions.
