Unraveling the Legal Saga: E. Jean Carroll’s Case Against Donald Trump.
Presidential immunity
via ABC 7 Chicago
Donald Trump’s lawyers are considering asking the Supreme Court to rule on whether he can use presidential immunity to avoid a defamation lawsuit from E. Jean Carroll.
The trial
via CBS News
They are also asking for the trial, set for January, to be delayed. This would be the second presidential immunity-related matter to head to the court.
The Supreme Court
via ABC News
“There is little doubt that the Supreme Court views presidential immunity as indispensable,” Trump lawyers Michael Madaio and Alina Habba wrote. “Mr. Smith is correct about the significance of the moment.”
The immunity defense
via CBS News
The 2nd Circuit ruled that Trump waited too long to invoke the immunity defense in the Carroll lawsuit, which concerns comments he made while president.
Waived this defense
via NBC News
“We hold that presidential immunity is waivable and that Defendant waived this defense,” a three-judge panel wrote.
He defamed her in 2022
via CNN
In May, a jury found that Trump sexually abused Carroll in the 1990s and that he defamed her in 2022 when he called her account a “hoax.” The jury ordered Trump to pay Carroll $5 million.
Captivated the nation
via NBC News
The legal battle between E. Jean Carroll and Donald Trump has captivated the nation, shedding light on issues of sexual misconduct, presidential immunity, and the quest for justice in the face of powerful figures.
The case unfolds
via CNN
At the center of the controversy is Carroll’s accusation that Trump sexually assaulted her in the mid-1990s, a claim vehemently denied by the former president. As the case unfolds in the courts, it raises profound questions about accountability, the rule of law, and the intersection of politics and justice in America.
A prominent writer
via CNN
E. Jean Carroll, a prominent writer and advice columnist, made headlines in 2019 when she accused Donald Trump of sexually assaulting her in a Bergdorf Goodman department store in Manhattan in the mid-1990s.
The alleged encounter
via TIME
In her memoir published that year, Carroll detailed the alleged encounter, describing Trump’s behavior as non-consensual and traumatic. Trump, in turn, dismissed Carroll’s claims as “fiction” and denied ever meeting her, despite a photograph showing the two together at a social event.
A defamation lawsuit
via CBS News
In November 2019, Carroll filed a defamation lawsuit against Trump, alleging that his denials amounted to false statements intended to damage her reputation and credibility. The lawsuit, filed in New York State Supreme Court, sought damages and a retraction of Trump’s statements.
Dismiss the case
via C-SPAN
Trump’s legal team moved to dismiss the case, arguing that the president is immune from civil litigation arising from actions taken while in office, a claim rejected by the court.
Carroll’s case against Trump
via CBS News
One of the central legal questions in Carroll’s case against Trump is the issue of presidential immunity. Trump’s defense team has argued that as a sitting president, he is shielded from civil litigation stemming from his official actions, including statements made in the course of his duties.
Personal misconduct
via CNN
However, legal experts point out that this immunity is not absolute and does not extend to actions taken outside the scope of presidential duties, such as allegations of personal misconduct predating or occurring outside of the presidential term.
Issues of accountability
via CBS News
The outcome of Carroll’s case against Trump has far-reaching implications beyond the individuals involved, touching on broader issues of accountability, transparency, and the rule of law. The case underscores the challenges of holding powerful individuals accountable for alleged wrongdoing, particularly in cases involving sexual misconduct and abuse of power.
Reignited debates
via CNN
Moreover, Carroll’s lawsuit has reignited debates about the limitations of presidential immunity and the extent to which sitting presidents should be subject to civil litigation.
The principle of equal justice
via ABC News
Critics argue that granting blanket immunity to presidents would undermine the principle of equal justice under the law and shield elected officials from accountability for their actions.
