Trump Appeals Verdict as E. Jean Carroll Case Stalls at Supreme Court
WASHINGTON-- A politically explosive appeal involving President Donald Trump and writer E. Jean Carroll has become one of the most closely watched mysteries on the Supreme Court’s docket, with the nation’s highest court repeatedly postponing action on the case while offering no public explanation for the unusual delay.
The appeal, which asks the justices to overturn a federal jury’s finding that Trump sexually abused and defamed Carroll, has now been rescheduled 15 times since reaching the court late last year. The repeated postponements have fueled growing speculation among court observers, legal analysts and political insiders about what may be happening behind the scenes.
The case was initially expected to be considered during a private conference of the justices on Feb. 27. But in a move that surprised court watchers, the appeal was abruptly removed from consideration one day before the justices met. No explanation was provided.
Since then, the case has repeatedly appeared on and disappeared from the court’s conference schedule, creating a procedural limbo that has persisted for months.
According to a CNN analysis, only one other case during the current Supreme Court term has been rescheduled as many times.
The prolonged delay comes as the legal battle between Trump and Carroll has continued to escalate on multiple fronts, transforming what began as a defamation dispute into one of the most consequential civil cases ever involving a sitting president.
Since Trump filed his appeal in November, he has suffered another major courtroom setback in a separate Carroll case that resulted in an $83 million judgment against him. At the same time, the Justice Department has opened a criminal investigation involving Carroll that is reportedly examining whether she made false statements under oath during testimony connected to the litigation.
Despite the mounting developments, the Supreme Court has remained silent.
As is customary, the court has offered no insight into why the appeal continues to be delayed, leaving legal experts to speculate about whether the justices are divided, drafting opinions behind closed doors, or waiting for related cases to arrive before making a decision.
Whatever the explanation, the practical effect has been clear: Trump has gained valuable time.
The delay has effectively postponed final resolution of a $5 million verdict awarded to Carroll by a New York jury more than three years ago.
“The unusual part isn’t simply that the court has rescheduled the case 15 times,” Georgetown Law professor and CNN Supreme Court analyst Steve Vladeck said. “It’s that there’s no obvious public explanation for why it keeps happening.”
Vladeck suggested the most plausible explanation is that the justices may be waiting for another Trump-Carroll appeal that is expected to arrive at the court soon, allowing the justices to consider both matters together.
Still, he acknowledged that the possibility raises questions because the two cases involve distinct legal issues.
“The alternative explanation would be some special treatment for President Trump,” Vladeck said, noting that such an interpretation is complicated by the fact that the underlying allegations concern conduct that allegedly occurred long before Trump entered public office.
The legal saga traces back to two separate lawsuits Carroll filed against Trump.
The first lawsuit was filed in 2019 after Trump publicly denied Carroll’s allegations and accused her of fabricating the story.
The second lawsuit was filed in 2022 after New York enacted a law temporarily allowing victims of alleged sexual abuse to bring civil claims involving incidents that occurred years earlier.
In an unusual twist, the later-filed case reached trial first.
That trial centered on Carroll’s allegation that Trump sexually assaulted her in a Manhattan department store dressing room during the mid-1990s before later defaming her by dismissing the accusation as a lie designed to promote book sales.
After hearing testimony, a jury concluded Trump was liable for sexual abuse and defamation, awarding Carroll $5 million in damages.
It is that verdict that is currently before the Supreme Court.
A second trial involving Trump’s 2019 statements took place later and resulted in an even larger judgment. A separate jury ordered Trump to pay Carroll roughly $83 million after finding that he continued to defame her while serving as president and after leaving office.
With accrued interest, Trump’s total financial exposure in the two cases now exceeds $100 million.
In challenging the $5 million verdict, Trump’s attorneys have argued that U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan committed a series of legal errors that unfairly prejudiced the jury against him.
Among other objections, Trump has criticized Kaplan’s decision to allow testimony from two women who alleged Trump sexually assaulted them years earlier.
His legal team has also attacked the judge’s decision to permit jurors to view the infamous 2005 “Access Hollywood” recording in which Trump was captured on a hot microphone making graphic comments about women.
In the recording, Trump described kissing women without waiting for permission and boasted that his celebrity status allowed him to engage in behavior that would otherwise be unacceptable.
Kaplan ruled that the recording was relevant because it could help jurors assess whether Trump had previously engaged in nonconsensual sexual conduct similar to the allegations raised by Carroll.
Federal appeals judges later agreed.
In 2025, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the $5 million verdict, concluding that Kaplan acted within his discretion and that none of Trump’s objections justified a new trial.
Trump subsequently failed to persuade the full appellate court to rehear the case, setting the stage for his appeal to the Supreme Court.
In court filings, Trump’s attorneys argued that the litigation has become a distraction from his duties as president.
“It is deeply damaging to the fabric of our republic,” Trump's lawyers wrote, “for President Trump, in the midst of a historic presidency, to have to divert attention from his singular responsibilities as chief executive to continue defending against decades-old false allegations.”
They urged the justices to intervene, arguing that allowing the verdict to stand would represent an injustice not only to Trump but also to the presidency itself.
Carroll’s attorneys have countered that the trial was conducted properly and that appellate courts have already thoroughly reviewed and rejected Trump’s claims.
The lawyers argued that the central question was straightforward: whether a reasonable jury could conclude, based on the evidence presented, that Trump committed sexual assault.
A unanimous three-judge appellate panel answered that question in the affirmative.
“The court’s duty was simply to decide whether a jury could reasonably find by a preponderance of the evidence that Mr. Trump committed an act of sexual assault,” the appellate judges wrote.
All briefing in the case was completed by the end of January.
That is when the repeated delays began.
While it is not uncommon for Supreme Court appeals to be discussed at multiple private conferences before a decision is reached, court observers note that the procedural posture of Trump’s appeal is especially unusual.
Most delayed cases are formally “relisted,” meaning the justices continue discussing them in future conferences.
Trump’s appeal has instead been repeatedly “rescheduled,” a technical distinction that suggests the case may not be reaching formal discussion at all.
The Supreme Court has occasionally allowed petitions to linger for months. Last year, a case involving federal criminal jurisdiction on Native American lands was rescheduled 17 times before ultimately being denied.
Still, such extended delays remain rare.
Complicating matters further, another Trump-Carroll case appears poised to arrive at the Supreme Court in the coming weeks.
Earlier this year, a federal appeals court upheld the separate $83 million judgment against Trump, rejecting arguments that he was protected by presidential immunity and finding the damages justified by what the court described as extraordinary facts.
The full appeals court later declined to reconsider that ruling.
In a recent filing, Trump’s attorneys informed the Supreme Court that they intend to appeal the $83 million case as well and suggested that the justices may wish to consider both matters together.
“The court may wish to consider the petitions together,” Trump's lawyers wrote.
If that occurs, legal analysts say any decision on whether the Supreme Court will hear the existing Carroll appeal could be pushed into the court’s next term, extending an already lengthy delay.
For now, the case remains in procedural limbo.
On Monday, the Supreme Court once again placed the appeal on its agenda for a private conference scheduled for Thursday, the latest chapter in a legal drama that continues to intertwine the presidency, the courts and one of the most contentious personal disputes in modern American politics.