Lawyers representing Donald Trump asked a federal judge in Manhattan late Tuesday to withhold approval for payment of a multi-million dollar award to E. Jean Carroll that arose from a 2023 civil verdict. The filing seeks to prevent the transfer of roughly $5 million in damages - now about $5.8 million with accrued interest - while the former president pursues a renewed appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
In their submission, Trump’s attorneys warned that if Carroll follows through on her stated plan to give away the money, Trump would suffer "unrecoverable loss" because such funds would likely be impossible to retrieve. The lawyers also argued that allowing the payout now, only to have the Supreme Court later grant a rehearing, would "undermine public confidence in an orderly judicial process," noting that both Trump supporters and some critics, they said, have voiced "concerns about politically motivated weaponization of the legal system."
The filing was made in the Manhattan federal court where the original 2023 civil trial that found Trump liable for sexually abusing and defaming Carroll was litigated. A spokesperson for Carroll declined to comment on Wednesday.
The Supreme Court turned down Trump's initial appeal on June 29, with none of the nine justices noting dissents. After that denial, Trump petitioned for a rehearing on Monday. A Tuesday docket entry stated that the renewed appeal was "not accepted for filing," with no explanation provided. Separately, Trump intends to press a second appeal to the Supreme Court challenging a larger January 2024 jury award.
The contested $5.8 million is currently held in a court-supervised escrow account. Trump's attorneys told the court that a premature release of those funds could result in irreversible harm if Carroll disposes of the money before the high court resolves the renewed petition.
Carroll, now 82, and Trump, 80, have been engaged in nearly seven years of litigation after Carroll accused him of raping her around 1996 in a dressing room at Bergdorf Goodman in Manhattan. Trump has denied the allegation, calling it a "hoax" and a "con job," and has said he did not know Carroll and that she fabricated the alleged assault to help promote a memoir.
Jurors in 2023 awarded Carroll $5 million tied to a 2022 denial by Trump, although they did not find he raped her. In January 2024, a separate jury ordered Trump to pay Carroll $83.3 million in damages based on an earlier 2019 denial that occurred during his first presidential term. Trump has argued that he is entitled to presidential immunity for that 2019 statement.
The Manhattan-based 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals declined last September to throw out the $83.3 million verdict. Trump has signaled he will seek Supreme Court review of that larger award as well, and his lawyers contend that a successful appeal could undercut the legal basis for the $5 million verdict tied to the 2022 denial.
Carroll's legal team has criticized what it views as delay tactics. In a June 30 court filing, her lawyers wrote that "it is time for him to pay Carroll." Trump's lawyers did not immediately respond to requests for comment after their late Tuesday filing.
Context and procedural posture
The dispute now centers on procedural and remedial questions: whether the district court should permit disbursement of the funds while the Supreme Court considers renewed petitions, and how to protect against the possibility that funds disbursed might not be recoverable if appellate review proceeds and the decisions are reopened.
At present, the money awarded in 2023 - increased by interest to about $5.8 million - remains under court supervision. The separate $83.3 million judgment from January 2024 is the subject of its own appeals and a Supreme Court petition, with Trump arguing the 2019 statements behind that award are covered by presidential immunity.
What remains unresolved
- The Supreme Court's handling of the renewed petitions - the court has initially declined to hear the case, and a rehearing petition was filed; a docket entry indicated a renewed appeal was "not accepted for filing" without explanation.
- Whether the district judge will permit immediate disbursement of the escrowed $5.8 million or delay that step until Supreme Court action is concluded.
- Potential practical consequences if Carroll distributes funds before the appellate process is complete.