Jun 19, 2025, 12:28 PM
Jun 18, 2025, 10:31 PM

Appeals court rejects DOJ effort to defend Trump in Carroll case

Highlights
  • A federal appeals court ruled that Trump's appeal against the $83 million defamation award to E. Jean Carroll would not be funded by taxpayers.
  • The court denied the Justice Department's request to substitute itself as Trump's legal representation due to presidential conduct during his first term.
  • This ruling adds to the legal challenges facing Trump, highlighting ongoing discussions surrounding the intersection of political actions and personal conduct.
Story

In the United States, a significant ruling has emerged from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit regarding former President Donald Trump's ongoing legal battles. The court determined that American taxpayers would not be responsible for funding Trump's appeal in an $83 million defamation case involving writer E. Jean Carroll. This decision comes after a New York jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation against Carroll, concluding that Trump's denial of the assault was false and damaging to her reputation. The case stems from an event in the mid-1990s, when Carroll accused Trump of sexually assaulting her in a department store. On June 19, 2025, the three-judge panel denied a request from the Justice Department to step in and represent Trump, emphasizing that he must remain the main defendant in the case. The Justice Department argued that since part of Trump's alleged conduct occurred during his presidency, it should be able to defend him under the Westfall Act. This act permits the United States to defend federal employees against legal claims related to their official actions, as long as those actions occurred within the scope of their duties. However, the appeals court ruled against this substitution without providing immediate reasoning, with a more detailed opinion expected in the future. The contentious nature of the case is evident in Trump's longstanding accusations that the Justice Department has been weaponized against him for political purposes. In response to the latest ruling, a spokesperson for Trump condemned it as further evidence of a politicized legal system, claiming that the American public supports Trump and wants an end to what they perceive as politically motivated prosecutions. The spokesperson referenced a recent substantial civil judgment against Trump, a verdict that adds to the mounting legal challenges he faces from various court cases. Oral arguments for Trump's appeal are scheduled to take place on June 24, and the outcome could have significant implications not only for Trump but also for the ongoing discussions about presidential accountability and the intersection of personal conduct with official duties. The fall-out from these cases will likely continue to spur public debate about the fairness of the legal system in dealing with high-profile figures and the extent to which taxpayers should bear the costs associated with such legal battles.

Opinions

You've reached the end