Federal Appeals Court Rejects Trump’s En Banc Bid in E. Jean Carroll Defamation Case

A divided federal appeals court in New York rejected President Donald Trump’s request to rehear his challenge to an E. Jean Carroll defamation verdict, leaving the $83 million award intact and setting up the next possible step toward the U.S. Supreme Court.

ABC News reported that a federal appeals court in New York on Wednesday rejected Trump’s request to rehear his challenges to Carroll’s successful defamation claims, after a jury awarded Carroll $83 million in damages in 2024.

- Rezo Nòdwès

The AP described the decision as the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ refusal to grant a rare meeting of its active judges, known as an “en banc” hearing, to hear an appeal of the $83 million verdict.

In the decision, Judge Denny Chin wrote that both Trump’s arguments—substituting the United States as a defendant and raising a claim of presidential immunity—were raised too late, stating, "The fact of the matter is that no other defendant would be permitted to move to substitute the United States in his place, fifteen months after trial and the entry of judgment against him."

CNN similarly said the full bench of judges would not rehear the appeal, paving the way for Trump to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to hear arguments involving presidential immunity.

Courthouse News added that the Second Circuit denied Trump’s petitions for en banc review of his defeated claims of presidential immunity in the civil rape and defamation case won by Carroll, quoting Chin: "The court appropriately declined to convene en bancto revisit this issue."

The appeals court’s refusal hinged on timing and procedural posture around Trump’s bid to substitute the United States as the defendant and to reassert presidential immunity.

ABC News said Trump tried unsuccessfully to substitute the United States as a defendant and to raise a claim of presidential immunity, and it reported that the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said both arguments were raised too late.

ABC News

In ABC News’ account, Judge Denny Chin wrote, "The fact of the matter is that no other defendant would be permitted to move to substitute the United States in his place, fifteen months after trial and the entry of judgment against him," and added, "The Court appropriately declined to convene en banc to revisit this issue."

AP News likewise said the decision came after a three-judge panel rejected Trump’s appeal of the $83 million verdict in September, and it described the en banc vote as five judges against rehearing and three in favor.

CNN reported that Trump argued the Justice Department should have been substituted for him as a defendant because he made the statements within the scope of his duties as president in response to questions by reporters, and it said the Justice Department can’t be sued for defamation so it would have ended the litigation.

Courthouse News added that the majority concluded presidential immunity is waivable and that Trump waived it in the Carroll case, quoting Chin: "If any other litigant had failed to raise an affirmative defense in this way, there would be no question as to whether he waived his right to assert it."

The en banc denial came after two separate civil trials involving Carroll and Trump, with different damage awards tied to different findings.

“Full federal appeals court won’t rehear $83 million defamation verdict against Trump Full federal appeals court won’t rehear $83 million defamation verdict against Trump NEW YORK (AP) — A divided federal appeals court said Wednesday it will not grant a rare meeting of its active judges to hear an appeal of an $83 million verdict against President Donald Trump for defaming a magazine advice columnist over an encounter three decades ago”

AP News

ABC News said a jury awarded Carroll $83 million in damages in 2024 after she successfully argued that Trump defamed her with comments he made disputing her claim he sexually abused her in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room in the 1990s.

It also said a separate jury in an earlier trial awarded Carroll $5 million in damages after holding Trump liable for defamation and sexual abuse.

AP News described that earlier $5 million decision as arising from a jury’s conclusion that Trump had sexually abused her in a department store dressing room in 1996 and later defamed her, and it said Trump appealed that $5 million decision to the Supreme Court.

CNN reported that the decision followed a six-year legal battle that resulted in two civil trials, and it said Trump briefly took the witness stand in one of them.

Courthouse News provided additional detail on the first trial’s damages and said the second defamation lawsuit resulted in $83.3 million in January 2024, including $65 million in punitive damages and $18.3 million in compensatory damages.

The decision drew sharp reactions and competing interpretations from judges and lawyers.

ABC News quoted Judge Denny Chin’s reasoning that substitution and immunity arguments were raised too late, and it also included Chin’s statement that the court declined to convene en banc to revisit the issue.

BBC

AP News added that Chin defended upholding the large defamation award, writing that “The record showed that Trump made multiple statements over many years accusing Carroll of lying for political and financial gain,” and it quoted Chin’s description of the consequences: "As a result of Trump’s statements, Carroll was harassed and humiliated, subjected to death threats, and feared for her physical safety for years."

In response to the Wednesday ruling, Carroll’s attorney Roberta Kaplan said in a statement, "We are pleased that the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has denied President Trump's petition for an en banc hearing in connection with the verdict from the second jury trial."

On the other side, multiple outlets described a dissent by Trump-appointed Circuit Judge Steven J. Menashi, with NBC News quoting Menashi’s view that the case warranted en banc review and with Courthouse News quoting Menashi’s dissenting position that both decisions were erroneous.

Menashi’s dissent argued that the appeals panel should have allowed the United States to be substituted for Trump after the attorney general certified Trump was acting within the “scope of his office or employment,” and Courthouse News quoted Menashi: "President Trump consistently raised the defense of presidential immunity throughout this litigation."

The denial of en banc review effectively leaves Trump with the option to seek Supreme Court review, while the broader legal stakes include how presidential immunity and substitution doctrines apply to statements made during Trump’s presidency.

“PresidentDonald Trumpfailed to convince the Second Circuit to give him a second shot at overturning an $83”

Bloomberg Law News

CNN said the decision “paves the way for Trump to ask the US Supreme Court to hear his arguments involving presidential immunity,” and it described the move as the latest turn in a six-year battle that produced two civil trials.

Bloomberg Law News

NBC News similarly said the decision opens the way for Trump to ask the Supreme Court to hear his argument of presidential immunity, and it described the appeals court’s dismissal of Trump’s request to replace the defendant with the United States and make another claim of presidential immunity.

USA TODAY reported that the full appeals court’s refusal on April 29 not to review the $83.3 million decision “tees up a potential appeal from Trump to the U.S. Supreme Court,” and it said Trump may now also take his appeal of the $83.3 million judgment to the Supreme Court.

UPI said the president is expected to ask the conservative-leaning Supreme Court to hear his case next, and it described the order as rejecting Trump’s arguments that he made the comments while president and that the United States should replace him as the defendant.

Several outlets also tied the next Supreme Court step to the earlier $5 million case, noting that Trump appealed to the Supreme Court after the high court has not yet decided whether to hear it.