The Supreme Court has denied President Trump's petition to reconsider its earlier refusal to hear his appeal of the $5 million E. Jean Carroll sexual abuse verdict, the second time the justices have declined to intervene in the case, even as a larger $83 million judgment looms.
The court issued the denial Monday without elaboration, disposing of Trump's rehearing petition alongside several other cases. Trump had already paid the $5 million judgment after the justices first declined his appeal on June 29, leaving the original jury finding intact. The Washington Examiner reported that Trump attempted to delay payment pending the rehearing petition but ultimately paid out last month.
The case traces back to a 2023 civil trial in which a jury found Trump liable for sexually assaulting Carroll, a longtime advice columnist and former television talk show host, in the mid-1990s at Bergdorf Goodman, a luxury retailer across the street from Trump Tower in Manhattan. The same jury also found Trump liable for defaming Carroll when he denied her allegation, awarding her $2 million for the sexual assault claim and $3 million for defamation, as National Review detailed.
Trump has denied any wrongdoing throughout the litigation.
Trump's legal team filed the rehearing petition after the court's June 29 denial, arguing the justices should reconsider because a related Carroll defamation case, carrying the far larger $83 million verdict, would raise presidential immunity questions that bear directly on the $5 million case. Michael Martinich-Sauter, filing on Trump's behalf, wrote in the petition:
"Petitioner President Donald J. Trump respectfully petitions for rehearing of this Court's June 29, 2026 order denying his petition for a writ of certiorari. Rehearing is warranted because President Trump will imminently file a petition for a writ of certiorari in Carroll v. Trump."
That argument faced steep odds. Supreme Court rules limit rehearing petitions to cases involving intervening circumstances that carry a "substantial or controlling effect," Fox News reported. The court evidently found no such circumstances here.
Before the case reached the Supreme Court, lower courts had refused to overturn the verdict. Just The News reported that the Supreme Court had scheduled a closed-door conference in February 2026 to consider whether to take up Trump's original petition, a step that ultimately ended in the June denial.
Trump's attorneys had argued in earlier filings that it is "deeply damaging to the fabric of our Republic" for a sitting president to continue fighting "against decades-old, false allegations and the myriad wrongs throughout this baseless case."
Monday's denial closes one chapter but leaves the larger legal battle unresolved. Trump and the Justice Department are jointly asking the Supreme Court to toss out a second Carroll verdict totaling $83 million. That appeal centers on a different legal theory: presidential immunity. Trump and the Justice Department argue he cannot be sued over comments he made about Carroll in 2019 while serving as president.
The $83 million case carries far higher financial stakes and a constitutional question the court has not yet addressed in this context. The Washington Examiner reported that a ruling on whether to hear that appeal is expected no earlier than October.
The immunity argument gives the second appeal a different posture than the $5 million case. With the Justice Department backing Trump's position, the court faces a formal request from the executive branch to define the boundaries of presidential immunity in civil defamation suits, a question with implications well beyond the Carroll litigation.
When the court first rejected his appeal in June, Trump said he was "surprised by the decision" and vowed he would "continue the fight against this Weaponization and Lawfare Case against me, including the ridiculous claim of Defamation, with all of my power and strength." That fight now narrows to the $83 million verdict alone.
The procedural history underscores how long this case has wound through the courts. After the 2023 trial, Judge Lewis Kaplan required Trump to deposit the judgment amount in an escrow account with accruing interest while he pursued his appeal. When appeals failed, Kaplan ordered Trump to pay Carroll the full amount.
The Associated Press noted that Carroll testified at the 2023 trial that Trump turned a friendly encounter in the mid-1990s into a violent attack in the dressing room at Bergdorf Goodman. The jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse but not rape, a distinction that mattered legally but did not reduce the financial penalty.
The Supreme Court's willingness to engage with the immunity question in the current term's major rulings may signal how seriously the justices weigh executive power claims. But on the narrower $5 million verdict, the court saw no reason to act, twice.
If the court agrees to hear the $83 million appeal, it would mark the first time the justices directly address whether a president's public statements denying personal misconduct allegations qualify for immunity from civil liability. That question sits at the intersection of executive privilege and individual accountability, and both sides have reason to want a definitive answer.
For now, Trump has paid the $5 million and exhausted every avenue to reverse it. The denial was issued without comment, as is standard when the court declines rehearing petitions. No justice publicly dissented.
The broader pattern is worth watching. The court has handed Trump losses in some civil matters while also delivering significant wins on executive power questions this term. How the justices handle the immunity argument in the $83 million case will say more about the court's direction than Monday's procedural denial ever could.
The $5 million question is settled. The $83 million question, and the constitutional principle behind it, is the one that matters now.
