Supreme Court rejects Trump bid to appeal E. Jean Carroll $5 million verdict

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: CNBC

Published Mon, Jun 29 2026 9:36 AM EDT Updated 2 Min Ago


The Supreme Court on Monday said it would not hear an appeal by President Donald Trump of a New York federal court jury’s verdict awarding the writer E. Jean Carroll $5 million for having been sexually abused and defamed by Trump.

Trump separately was found civilly liable by another Manhattan federal court jury for having defamed Carroll. She was awarded $83.3 million in that case, which Trump is appealing at a lower federal appeals court.

The Supreme Court did not explain why it rejected Trump’s request that it hear his appeal of the $5 million verdict from the 2023 trial, as is typical for such orders. None of the justices, three of whom were appointed to the high court by Trump, issued a written dissent to the decision.

Carroll in a 2019 New York magazine article alleged that Trump had raped her in a dressing room of the Bergdorf Goodman department store in the mid-1990s. She later filed a civil lawsuit alleging rape and that he had defamed her when he denied her claims. A judge in May 2023 found that Trump had sexually abused Carroll, and defamed her.


Read more: https://www.cnbc.com/2026/06/29/supreme-court-trump-carroll-appeal.html

---

Article updated.

Previous articles -

Published Mon, Jun 29 2026 9:36 AM EDT Updated 2 Min Ago


The Supreme Court on Monday said it would not hear an appeal by President Donald Trump of a New York federal court jury's verdict awarding the writer E. Jean Carroll $5 million for having been sexually abused and defamed by Trump.

Trump separately was found civilly liable by another Manhattan federal court jury for having defamed Carroll. She was awarded $83.3 million in that case, which Trump is appealing at a lower federal appeals court.

The Supreme Court did not explain why it rejected Trump's request that it hear his appeal of the $5 million verdict, as is typical for such orders. None of the justices, three of whom were appointed to the high court by Trump, issued a written dissent to the decision.


This is breaking news. Please refresh for updates.

Published Mon, Jun 29 2026 9:36 AM EDT Updated 1 Min Ago


The Supreme Court on Monday said it would not hear an appeal by President Donald Trump of a New York federal court jury's verdict awarding the writer E. Jean Carroll $5 million for having been sexually abused and defamed by Trump.

Trump separately was found civilly liable by another Manhattan federal court jury for having defamed Carroll. She was awarded $83.3 million in that case, which Trump is appealing at a lower federal appeals court.


This is breaking news. Please refresh for updates.

Original article -

Published Mon, Jun 29 2026 9:36 AM EDT


This is breaking news. Please refresh for updates.

[tanyev]

1. Ooh, gonna be a busy day on Truth Social.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

12. And those poor catsup bottles that are now, as we speak,

being lined up and ready to throw at the WH walls.

[wolfie001]

18. I'm hijacking that GIF!

For future endeavors!

[Bengus81]

2. How many of them will have a "retirement" announcement before the end of the year?

Two,three more???

[riversedge]

3. The SCOTUS has settled it!!---Trump LOST and IS a Sex Felon!!

I suspect E. Jean Carroll is raising a glass---even if only orange juice this early in the morning.
ONE down and One to go for her--the biggy!!


Kyle Griffin
‪@kylegriffin1.bsky.social‬
Reuters: U.S. SUPREME COURT DECLINES TO HEAR TRUMP'S APPEAL OF $5 MILLION JURY VERDICT WON BY E. JEAN CARROLL IN 2023 FOR SEXUAL ABUSE AND DEFAMATION

Reuters: U.S. SUPREME COURT DECLINES TO HEAR TRUMP'S APPEAL OF MILLION JURY VERDICT WON BY E. JEAN CARROLL IN 2023 FOR SEXUAL ABUSE AND DEFAMATION

— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1.bsky.social) 2026-06-29T13:38:19.357Z

[wolfie001]

19. He had a hand in Ivana's "fall"

In my opinion. Probably some of Putin's thugs he allowed in.

[homegirl]

22. Donald lost

that case when he refused to supply a DNA sample!

[ShazzieB]

31. So, in other words...

...he lost the case either way! Because we all know whose DNA that was.

Anyone with a lick of sense would have tried to settle out of court, but his ego wouldn't let him do that. So instead, there was a trial in which every detail of that sordid story became part of the public record.

Also, the amount the jury awarded him was huge, and it got even huger when he turned right around and started defaming her again. Are you tired of all the winning yet, Donald?

[popsdenver]

32. LOL

And just WHO is going to make him pay it????????????????

[homegirl]

40. What I learned

from winning a judgement.

If you do not have access to the losers checking account or any bank account number and location, a Sheriff will be placed at the cash register of any business owned by the loser and collect the daily cash, check and credit card proceeds until the judgement is satisfied.

Wouldn't that be a sight to see at the restaurant in Trump Tower! Sure to be the opener on every evening news broadcast!

[popsdenver]

45. Now that would be hysterical.........

But as I recall, many years ago, with the oil tanker in Alaska, I distinctly remember that Exxon was ordered by the U.S. Supreme Court to pay six billion dollars for the cleanup, and Exxon told them they wouldn't comply........Exxon, I think, made a token payment over the next few years, but not anywhere near the total amount of the settlement?????????

Any ways, there isn't much cash to take, at Trump Tower Restaurant, as most of the business at his restaurant is credit cards

[druidity33]

48. The internet tells me...

that Exxon paid out roughly 3 billion for the disaster that was Valdez. Wikipedia has the deets:

Exxon appealed again. On May 23, 2007, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals denied ExxonMobil's request for a third hearing and let stand its ruling that Exxon owed $2.5 billion in punitive damages. Exxon then appealed to the Supreme Court, which agreed to hear the case.[49] On February 27, 2008, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments. Justice Samuel Alito, who at the time owned between $100,000 and $250,000 in Exxon stock, recused himself from the case.[50] In a decision issued June 25, 2008, written by Justice David Souter, the court vacated the $2.5 billion award and remanded the case back to the lower court, finding that the damages were excessive with respect to maritime common law. Exxon's actions were deemed "worse than negligent but less than malicious."[51] The punitive damages were further reduced to an amount of $507.5 million.[52] The Court's ruling was that maritime punitive damages should not exceed the compensatory damages,[52] supported by a precedent dating from 1818.[citation needed] Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick J. Leahy has decried the ruling as "another in a line of cases where this Supreme Court has misconstrued congressional intent to benefit large corporations."[53]

Exxon's official position was that punitive damages greater than $25 million were not justified because the spill resulted from an accident, and because Exxon spent an estimated $2 billion cleaning up the spill and a further $1 billion to settle related civil and criminal charges. Attorneys for the plaintiffs contended that Exxon bore responsibility for the accident because the company "put a drunk in charge of a tanker in Prince William Sound."[54] Exxon recovered a significant portion of clean-up and legal expenses through insurance claims associated with the grounding of Exxon Valdez.[55][56]

As of December 15, 2009, Exxon had paid the entire $507.5 million in punitive damages, including lawsuit costs, plus interest, which were further distributed to thousands of plaintiffs.[57] This amount was one-tenth of the original punitive damages, Exxon remained hugely profitable, the process of payment was drawn out over decades, and long term damage continues and is not funded by Exxon. Hence, the Exxon spill is often cited as shorthand for corporate responsibility for societal damage not being enforced adequately.[58]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exxon_Valdez_oil_spill

[popsdenver]

49. Thx Druid

The corporations are running America, and it has become much much worse since the Exxon incident......

The blow out in the Gulf Mexico was even more of a Charlie Foxtrot with BP basically deciding everything, and royally screwing up what little they did......Un-fathomable what they did/didn't do, and they created a monstrous mess for years to come that is not being acknowledged.............It was a far greater gift to BP financially than the Exxon nightmare......

Don't know why the powers to be don't just rename us to: The United Corporations of America...................

[BonnieJW]

44. Didn't he have to put up the award in order to appeal?

[muriel_volestrangler]

4. Pay up, mf-ing rapist. Even your Supreme Court won't let you off this. (nt)

[muriel_volestrangler]

5. According to Reuters, he'd had to put $5.55m in a federal court account to make his appeal

https://web.archive.org/web/20230624142004/https://www.reuters.com/legal/trump-sets-aside-money-while-he-appeals-e-jean-carrolls-5-million-verdict-2023-06-23/

so I hope this means that goes to her, right now. Tell me, US lawyers, am I being optimistic?

[homegirl]

24. Next will be

Donald's appeal on the defamation case. Ms. Carroll has been awarded $83 million plus interest. Since the SC squashed Trump's appeal on the rape case Ms. Carroll should be collecting the $83 Million + judgement on that case very soon!

[Bengus81]

13. Ya damn skippy!!! PAY UP and STFU TRUMP!!!!!!!!!

Now...on to your PEDO trial and CONVICTION

[LetMyPeopleVote]

6. Supreme Court shuts down Trump's sexual abuse appeal (trump has to pay the $5 million E. Jean Carrol judgment)

trump is going to have pay E. Jean Carroll. This makes smile

Supreme Court shuts down Trump's sexual abuse appeal

www.rawstory.com/supreme-cour...

— OnePissedOffLibtard (@theycallmelibtard.bsky.social) 2026-06-29T13:54:56.173Z

https://www.rawstory.com/supreme-court-rejects-trump-carroll/

The Supreme Court on Monday refused to hear President Donald Trump's appeal of the E. Jean Carroll sexual abuse verdict, leaving a $5 million judgment against him intact.

A jury found Trump liable in 2023 for sexually abusing writer E. Jean Carroll in a New York department store dressing room in the mid-1990s.

They also found he defamed her when he denied it. The verdict carried $5 million in damages.....

The Supreme Court rescheduled the case from one private conference to the next 15 times since February before Monday's denial. CNN reported that only one other case had been rescheduled as often this term.

Georgetown Law professor Steve Vladeck drew a key distinction: the court kept "rescheduling" the petition, not "relisting" it. Relisting means the justices are actually discussing the case. Rescheduling means they are not.

"It is really difficult to believe that the Court would show anywhere near the same kind of procedural deference to any litigant other than Trump," Vladeck wrote.

Carroll can now move to collect the $5 million.

[bluestarone]

34. Great news here. Now the question of the day is

After TSF raises a HUGE shit fit on his site, saying bad shit about her,will he cause another HUGE lawsuit with her? I hope she gets opportunity number TWO!! Go get his ass Jean!!

[3Hotdogs]

7. Stock tip: BUY FUTURES IN HEINZ COMPANY.

You're welcome.

[Ponietz]

8. MF47 won't get over this

This is yuge.

[WestMichRad]

9. All he has left with this case is an executive order...

… stating “I don’t hafta pay, neener neener!

[SamuelAdams]

10. The media should start referring to him as rapist Trump.

[Bev54]

11. So can she finally go after her money? Put liens on his assets, start selling some

maybe garnishee his wages?

[Bengus81]

14. Real total....$83 MILLION. How about a couple of years interest?

[onenote]

16. The $83 million verdict is still pending review.

The Second Circuit denied rehearing en banc on April 29. Trump has 90 days from then to file a petition for a writ of certiorari seeking review in that case. The denial of cert in the first case doesn't bode well for him, but doesn't preclude the court from granting cert in the second case.

[chowder66]

20. This is the one they will probably take on and rule in is favor for.

I hope I'm wrong.

[bluestarone]

35. Hope you're wrong too!

She should receive EVERY PENNY!!

[LetMyPeopleVote]

23. There is an appeal bond up

Carroll will be paid by the bonding company who will collect from trump. There is collateral securing this bond that the bonding company will be getting

[Bengus81]

42. And when he doesn't pay.....bench order for his fucking arrest!

[LetMyPeopleVote]

46. The bonding company will pay Carroll.

The bonding company had pledged liquid assets that the bonding company will liquidate to cover judgment Carol does not have to deal with trump since there is a bond up

[Bengus81]

51. So Trump owes some probably Epstein billionaire what $80+ million?

Better pay up on that debt Fat Hitler...........

[homegirl]

41. Love it!

Garnish his wages. snatch his federal paychecks!!! Additionally a win for the taxpayers, we can relate, after all his paycheck is OUR money!

[creeksneakers2]

15. Hooray!

[wolfie001]

17. 3 anti-tRUMP decisions in one day!

I'm flabbergasted! And happy!

[TBF]

21. He won on firing Rebecca Slaughter -

The Supreme Court ruled Monday that President Donald Trump did have the authority to fire Federal Trade Commission Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter.

So, I don't know where we are in terms of numbers, but at least he's losing some. E Jean Carroll verdict stands (Yay!!), and the Mississippi ballot case was a great win.

[LilElf70]

25. Awwwww................

Isn't this terrible? GREAT!!!!!

I love it. Maybe the awipe will pay now.

[llmart]

28. $5 million is just a drop in the bucket for him.

Also, he's grifted/stolen billions from us, so as much as I'm happy for Ms. Carroll, he won't be in the poor house because of the ruling. The most we can hope for is that he'll blow a stroke because "his" Supreme Court didn't do as he wanted.

[Bengus81]

52. Trump owes Carroll over $80 Million........

$5M was the original amount IF Trump would have shut his fucking mouth for a minute or two. So they filed again and got more damages.

In fact yesterday he was again defaming her. He can't shut up.

[viva la]

26. John Roberts totally deserves this--

Elevated to this august position, and he's now ruling on Trump's assault and lying cases. Tawdry.

[onenote]

38. Trump didn't appoint Roberts.

[viva la]

47. Yeah, but he owns him.

He didn't appoint Thomas or Alito either, and he owns them too.

[PlanetBev]

27. Does anyone know who dissented?

My money is on Coke Can Clarence. A no brainer, for sure.

[BumRushDaShow]

29. This was a "shadow docket" case

Per the article, no registered dissents -

None of the justices, three of whom were appointed to the high court by Trump, issued a written dissent to the decision.

[onenote]

39. Actually, it was not a "shadow docket" case.

It was a decision on a petition for a writ of certiorari filed by Trump seeking Supreme Court review of the decision on the merits by the Second Circuit upholding the verdict and damages award in the first Carroll case.

The "shadow docket" refers to cases in which emergency relief, typically in the form of a stay of a lower court decision pending further review, sought outside the regular order. Petitions for certiorari are part of the regular order. And Trump wasn't seeking a stay of the appeals court decision -- in fact, that decision had been stayed by the second circuit pending action on the petition for certiorari. Now that the petition has been decided, the second circuit's "mandate" will issue and Trump will be required to comply with the verdict.

It is typically the case that decisions on petitions for certiorari do not have published dissents, although there are exceptions. For example, the denial of Trump's petition for cert in the Carroll case was one of over 90 cases in which the court announced it was denying a petition for cert today. Of those 90+ cases, there was a noted dissent in only three, including the denial of Alan Dershowitz's petition for cert in his defamation case.

[BumRushDaShow]

50. I lump those in with the "shadow docket"

because of 45's excessive use of running to the SCOTUS for a favorable decision on some dispute with a lower court.

[Talitha]

30. Wait till he finds out he can't fire Supreme Court Justices.

[durablend]

43. Oh he'll try

That or appeal to the Super Supreme Court that he "just created"

[ShazzieB]

33. It's good to know the Supreme Court is still capable of doing the right thing once in a while.

This doesn't begin to make up for all the things they've gotten horrendously wrong, but it does help a little.

It's especially interesting that none of the Sinister Six, or even the Gruesome Twosome, felt moved to write a dissent. It's almost as if there are some lines even they won't cross!

[purr-rat beauty]

36. I hope she is safe and protected

I am not convinced trump won't try to harm her

but if she someone is harmed or worse, let's not play stupid.

trump is a criminal through and through

[AllaN01Bear]

37. ding. this .

[LetMyPeopleVote]

53. Deadline Legal Blog-'Time for him to pay': E. Jean Carroll moves to collect after Trump's SCOTUS rejection

The Supreme Court declined to review Trump’s petition on Monday. On Tuesday, Carroll’s lawyers said it’s “time for him to pay” the $5,779,783 he owes.

Link to tweet

https://www.ms.now/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/e-jean-carroll-moves-to-collect-trump-scotus-denied

When the Supreme Court declined to consider President Donald Trump’s appeal against E. Jean Carroll on Monday, she moved a step closer to collecting her $5 million (plus interest) from one of the two civil cases she won against him.

On Tuesday, her lawyers said the president was still trying to put off paying but that it was “the end of the line” and “time for him to pay Carroll.”

They made those statements in a court filing to the New York district court that oversaw her 2023 trial, where a jury found Trump liable for sexually abusing the writer in 1996 and defaming her in 2022. Carroll’s lawyers said that “after four years of litigation across every level of the federal court system, it is time for this case to end.”

The latest potential hitch is that her lawyers said a lawyer for Trump has asked if they would agree to further delay so he can ask the Supreme Court to reconsider its refusal to review his petition. Carroll’s lawyers declined another postponement, noting a prior stipulation between the parties provides for payment upon the denial of Trump’s petition.

They added that there’s no reason to think the court would reconsider its denial, seeing as it just rejected Trump’s petition without any justices signaling interest in the case. It takes four justices to grant review.

“Accordingly, the Court should direct the Clerk to disburse to Carroll the value of the judgment including post-judgment interest, which amounts to $5,779,783.00 in total as of the date of this filing,” Carroll’s lawyers wrote to the district court on Tuesday. They urged the court to “reject his latest effort to delay and instead bring this long-running litigation to an end.”

trump has a bond up that Carroll can draw on if trump does not pay. trump is a rapist and needs to pay up