Latest news with #SecondCircuitCourtofAppeals
UPI
11-07-2025
- Politics
- UPI
Court strikes down Trump's appeal in Carroll sexual abuse case
US President Donald Trump during a meeting with African leaders at the White House, Washington, DC, on Wednesday, July 9, 2025. On Thursday, an appeals court ruled against his challenge to a jury's unanimous decision that he sexually abused a writer in the 1990s. Photo by Will Oliver/UPI | License Photo July 11 (UPI) -- A federal appeals court has sided with the jury that found President Donald Trump liable of sexually abusing writer E. Jean Carroll in the 1990s and of lying about the assault. The three-judge Second Circuit Court of Appeals issued its mandate Thursday, affirming the May 2023 Manhattan jury's unanimous decision that Trump had sexually abused Carroll in a Bergdorf Goodman department stor in 1996 and awarded her $5 million in compensatory damages. "So long, Old Man!" Carroll celebrated on X. "The United States Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit, bids thee farewell." Trump maintains he didn't sexually abuse her, and filed an appeal. He argued the Manhattan district court had erred when it allowed testimony from two other women who alleged Trump had sexually assaulted them in the past and a notorious 2005 recording in which the president is heard on a hot mic telling another man how he forcibly kissed and grabbed women by their genitals. In its ruling rejecting Trump's appeal, the court found the district court did not err by including both women's testimonies as well as the so-called Access Hollywood tape as evidence of the president's alleged history of committing such acts. "We conclude that Mr. Trump has not demonstrated that the district court erred in any of the challenged rulings," it said. "Further, he has not carried his burden to show that any claimed error or combination of claimed errors affected his substantial rights as required to warrant a new trial." In January 2024, another civil jury found Trump liable for defamatory statements and ordered him to pay the writer $83.3 million in damages. After Carroll went public with her accusations against Trump in 2019, Trump claimed to have never met her and accused her of making up the allegation to sell books.
Yahoo
24-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trump's lawyers say the Supreme Court's sweeping presidential immunity ruling should save him $83.3 million
Trump is arguing that presidential immunity should invalidate a $83.3 million jury verdict. A jury last year ordered him to pay millions in defamation damages to E. Jean Carroll. His lawyers now say the Supreme Court's sweeping immunity decision changes everything. A federal appeals court is weighing a question important to Donald Trump: Can presidential immunity save him $83.3 million? Lawyers for Trump and E. Jean Carroll argued Tuesday morning at the Second Circuit Court of Appeals over whether the president had, years earlier, waived the right to argue he had presidential immunity by failing to bring it up until late in the litigation process. Justin D. Smith, who represents Trump, argued that presidential immunity is akin to the robust immunity members of Congress have through the Constitution's speech and debate clause, rather than the more easily waived immunity given to prosecutors and judges. "Presidential immunity — even if it could be waived at all, which is not the case — cannot be inadvertently forfeited," Trump's lawyers argued in their appeal brief for the Carroll case. In January 2024, a jury ordered Trump to pay $83.3 million in defamation damages for his many attacks on Carroll, where he disparaged her as a liar and insulted her appearance after she accused him of sexually assaulting him in the 1990s at a Bergdorf Goodman department store near Trump Tower in Manhattan. According to a Forbes estimate, Trump's net worth is $5.2 billion. It's boomed since he won the 2024 presidential election thanks to his ownership of Truth Social and numerous crypto investments. The Carroll verdict is about 1.6% of his estimated worth. Before the trial, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Trump had forfeited the right to argue he had presidential immunity in the civil case because he waited too long. But last year, the Supreme Court adopted a more powerful conception of presidential immunity — one that protects presidents from criminal cases. That broader, more sweeping view should also cover Trump in the Carroll case and wipe away the massive jury award, the president's lawyers now argue. Carroll's first defamation lawsuit against Trump, filed in 2020, was stalled for years in courts in New York and Washington, DC, because it concerned comments Trump made while he was still president. The Justice Department argued at the time that Trump was immune from the lawsuit because of the Westfall Act, a law that protects government employees from legal action for statements they make as part of their job. After completing his first term in office, Trump continued to attack Carroll online and at rallies. Carroll filed a second lawsuit against Trump in November 2022, alleging defamation as well as sexual abuse. That second lawsuit, unencumbered by questions of presidential immunity, went to trial in 2023 in Manhattan federal court. In May of that year, the jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation and ordered him to pay Carroll $5 million. Carroll's first lawsuit finally went to trial in January of 2024. After not showing up to the first trial, Trump briefly testified in the second. Because another jury had already found Trump liable for defamation for calling Carroll a liar over her sexual abuse claims, the jury in the second trial only had to decide how much Trump would pay in additional damages for statements he made while he was president, as well as other insults he had hurled at Carroll since the conclusion of the first trial. They landed at $65 million in punitive damages, $7.3 million to compensate Carroll, and $11 million to help repair her reputation — a total of $83.3 million. "Presidential immunity shields from liability President Trump's public statements issued in his official capacity through official White House channels," Trump's lawyers wrote in an appeal brief. Carroll's attorney Roberta Kaplan argued in her own brief that presidential immunity — like all other forms of immunity in the American legal system — can be waived. The Supreme Court's decision didn't indicate otherwise, she said in court. "It doesn't use the word 'waiver,' and it doesn't speak to waiver," she told the judges Tuesday. Smith argued that, because last year's Supreme Court decision didn't address issues of waivability, the appellate judges should instead look at other precedents related to speech-and-debate immunity for members of Congress. "Waiver was not addressed in that case because it didn't need to be," he said. Kaplan also addressed questions from the judges about the enormous damages the jury awarded Carroll. She said it was justified because of the threats Carroll received after accusing Trump of sexual assault, and because of the "disdain" Trump showed for Carroll and the court during the trial, as well as his continuing to defame her at press conferences while the trial was ongoing. "They threatened her with rape and with killing by every means known to man," Kaplan told the judges of the many messages Carroll received following Trump's criticism. Kaplan declined to comment on the arguments after the hearing. "We thank the court for its time," Kaplan told BI, before turning around to speak to Carroll, who sat behind her during the arguments. John Sauer, who argued the immunity case on Trump's behalf before the Supreme Court, also filed appeal briefs in the Carroll case. In September, Sauer urged the Second Circuit in an oral argument to toss the jury verdict against Trump in the first Carroll trial, in part because it featured testimony from other women who said Trump sexually abused them. The court upheld that verdict earlier this month. Sauer is now serving as the Justice Department's solicitor general in the second Trump administration. And on Wednesday, the court denied a motion from the Justice Department to take over Trump's defense. Smith, a Missouri-based attorney at Sauer's former law firm, argued against Kaplan at Tuesday's hearing instead. Following the hearing, a spokesperson for Trump's legal team referred to Carroll's cases as "the Democrat-funded Carroll Hoaxes" and said the Justice Department should take over Trump's defense "because Carroll based her false claims on the President's official acts, including statements from the White House." "President Trump will keep winning against Liberal Lawfare, as he is focusing on his mission to Make America Great Again," the spokesperson said. In two of Trump's other high-profile appeals, Trump has retained the Big Law firm Sullivan & Cromwell. They're fighting a half-billion-dollar civil fraud judgment against the Trump Organization as well as a Manhattan jury verdict that found Trump guilty of 34 counts of falsifying business documents as part of the Stormy Daniels hush-money scandal. In the criminal case, Sullivan & Cromwell — which argued their appeal before the Second Circuit earlier this month — also leans heavily on the Supreme Court's immunity decision. Sullivan & Cromwell cochair Robert Giuffra and Boris Epshteyn, Trump's senior personal legal counsel, attended Tuesday's arguments. In the elevator following the arguments, Epshteyn put his hand on Smith's shoulder. "You did good," Epshteyn told him. Read the original article on Business Insider
Business Insider
24-06-2025
- Politics
- Business Insider
Trump's lawyers say the Supreme Court's sweeping presidential immunity ruling should save him $83.3 million
A federal appeals court is weighing a question important to Donald Trump: Can presidential immunity save him $83.3 million? Lawyers for Trump and E. Jean Carroll argued Tuesday morning at the Second Circuit Court of Appeals over whether the president had, years earlier, waived the right to argue he had presidential immunity by failing to bring it up until late in the litigation process. Justin D. Smith, who represents Trump, argued that presidential immunity is akin to the robust immunity members of Congress have through the Constitution's speech and debate clause, rather than the more easily waived immunity given to prosecutors and judges. "Presidential immunity — even if it could be waived at all, which is not the case — cannot be inadvertently forfeited," Trump's lawyers argued in their appeal brief for the Carroll case. In January 2024, a jury ordered Trump to pay $83.3 million in defamation damages for his many attacks on Carroll, where he disparaged her as a liar and insulted her appearance after she accused him of sexually assaulting him in the 1990s at a Bergdorf Goodman department store near Trump Tower in Manhattan. According to a Forbes estimate, Trump's net worth is $5.2 billion. It's boomed since he won the 2024 presidential election thanks to his ownership of Truth Social and numerous crypto investments. The Carroll verdict is about 1.6% of his estimated worth. Before the trial, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Trump had forfeited the right to argue he had presidential immunity in the civil case because he waited too long. But last year, the Supreme Court adopted a more powerful conception of presidential immunity — one that protects presidents from criminal cases. That broader, more sweeping view should also cover Trump in the Carroll case and wipe away the massive jury award, the president's lawyers now argue. Carroll took Trump to trial twice Carroll's first defamation lawsuit against Trump, filed in 2020, was stalled for years in courts in New York and Washington, DC, because it concerned comments Trump made while he was still president. The Justice Department argued at the time that Trump was immune from the lawsuit because of the Westfall Act, a law that protects government employees from legal action for statements they make as part of their job. After completing his first term in office, Trump continued to attack Carroll online and at rallies. Carroll filed a second lawsuit against Trump in November 2022, alleging defamation as well as sexual abuse. That second lawsuit, unencumbered by questions of presidential immunity, went to trial in 2023 in Manhattan federal court. In May of that year, the jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation and ordered him to pay Carroll $5 million. Carroll's first lawsuit finally went to trial in January of 2024. After not showing up to the first trial, Trump briefly testified in the second. Because another jury had already found Trump liable for defamation for calling Carroll a liar over her sexual abuse claims, the jury in the second trial only had to decide how much Trump would pay in additional damages for statements he made while he was president, as well as other insults he had hurled at Carroll since the conclusion of the first trial. They landed at $65 million in punitive damages, $7.3 million to compensate Carroll, and $11 million to help repair her reputation — a total of $83.3 million. Trump invoked the Supreme Court's recent immunity decision "Presidential immunity shields from liability President Trump's public statements issued in his official capacity through official White House channels," Trump's lawyers wrote in an appeal brief. Carroll's attorney Roberta Kaplan argued in her own brief that presidential immunity — like all other forms of immunity in the American legal system — can be waived. The Supreme Court's decision didn't indicate otherwise, she said in court. "It doesn't use the word 'waiver,' and it doesn't speak to waiver," she told the judges Tuesday. Smith argued that, because last year's Supreme Court decision didn't address issues of waivability, the appellate judges should instead look at other precedents related to speech-and-debate immunity for members of Congress. "Waiver was not addressed in that case because it didn't need to be," he said. Kaplan also addressed questions from the judges about the enormous damages the jury awarded Carroll. She said it was justified because of the threats Carroll received after accusing Trump of sexual assault, and because of the "disdain" Trump showed for Carroll and the court during the trial, as well as his continuing to defame her at press conferences while the trial was ongoing. "They threatened her with rape and with killing by every means known to man," Kaplan told the judges of the many messages Carroll received following Trump's criticism. Kaplan declined to comment on the arguments after the hearing. "We thank the court for its time," Kaplan told BI, before turning around to speak to Carroll, who sat behind her during the arguments. John Sauer, who argued the immunity case on Trump's behalf before the Supreme Court, also filed appeal briefs in the Carroll case. In September, Sauer urged the Second Circuit in an oral argument to toss the jury verdict against Trump in the first Carroll trial, in part because it featured testimony from other women who said Trump sexually abused them. The court upheld that verdict earlier this month. Sauer is now serving as the Justice Department's solicitor general in the second Trump administration. And on Wednesday, the court denied a motion from the Justice Department to take over Trump's defense. Smith, a Missouri-based attorney at Sauer's former law firm, argued against Kaplan at Tuesday's hearing instead. Following the hearing, a spokesperson for Trump's legal team referred to Carroll's cases as "the Democrat-funded Carroll Hoaxes" and said the Justice Department should take over Trump's defense "because Carroll based her false claims on the President's official acts, including statements from the White House." "President Trump will keep winning against Liberal Lawfare, as he is focusing on his mission to Make America Great Again," the spokesperson said. In two of Trump's other high-profile appeals, Trump has retained the Big Law firm Sullivan & Cromwell. They're fighting a half-billion-dollar civil fraud judgment against the Trump Organization as well as a Manhattan jury verdict that found Trump guilty of 34 counts of falsifying business documents as part of the Stormy Daniels hush-money scandal. In the criminal case, Sullivan & Cromwell — which argued their appeal before the Second Circuit earlier this month — also leans heavily on the Supreme Court's immunity decision. Sullivan & Cromwell cochair Robert Giuffra and Boris Epshteyn, Trump's senior personal legal counsel, attended Tuesday's arguments. In the elevator following the arguments, Epshteyn put his hand on Smith's shoulder.
Business Insider
24-06-2025
- Business
- Business Insider
Trump is testing how far presidential immunity will go to save him millions
A federal appeals court will weigh a question important to Donald Trump on Tuesday morning: Can presidential immunity save him $83.3 million? In January 2024, a jury ordered Trump to pay the millions in defamation damages for his many attacks on the writer E. Jean Carroll, where he disparaged her as a liar and insulted her appearance after she accused him of sexually assaulting him in the 1990s at a Bergdorf Goodman department store near Trump Tower in Manhattan. According to a Forbes estimate, Trump's net worth is $5.2 billion. It's boomed since he won the 2024 presidential election thanks to his ownership of Truth Social and numerous crypto investments. The Carroll verdict is about 1.6% of his estimated worth. Before the trial, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Trump had forfeited the right to argue he had presidential immunity in the civil case because he waited too long to bring it up. But last year, the Supreme Court adopted a more robust conception of presidential immunity — one that protects presidents from criminal cases. That broader, more sweeping view should also cover Trump in the Carroll case and wipe away the massive jury award, the president's lawyers now argue. "Presidential immunity — even if it could be waived at all, which is not the case — cannot be inadvertently forfeited," Trump's lawyers argued in their appeal brief for the Carroll case. Carroll took Trump to trial twice Carroll's first defamation lawsuit against Trump, filed in 2020, was stalled for years in courts in New York and Washington, DC, because it concerned comments Trump made while he was still president. The Justice Department argued at the time that Trump was immune from the lawsuit because of the Westfall Act, a law that protects government employees from legal action for statements they make as part of their job. After completing his first term in office, Trump continued to attack Carroll on social media and at campaign rallies. Carroll filed a second lawsuit against Trump in November 2022, alleging defamation as well as sexual abuse. That second lawsuit, unencumbered by questions of presidential immunity, went to trial in 2023 in Manhattan federal court. In May of that year, the jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation and ordered him to pay Carroll $5 million. After the trial for the second lawsuit was over, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals cleared the way for a second trial over the first lawsuit, agreeing with a lower court that Trump had waived the right to argue that he had presidential immunity because he brought it up too late. The Justice Department — then under the Biden administration — also dropped its position that Trump's statements about Carroll were part of his presidential duties, writing in a court filing that "sexual assault was obviously not job-related." Carroll's first lawsuit finally went to trial in January of 2024. After not showing up to the first trial, Trump briefly testified in the second. Because another jury had already found Trump liable for defamation for calling Carroll a liar over her sexual abuse claims, the jury in the second trial only had to decide how much Trump would pay in additional damages for statements he made while he was president, as well as other insults he had hurled at Carroll since the conclusion of the first trial. They settled for $65 million in punitive damages, $7.3 million to compensate Carroll, and $11 million to help repair her reputation — a total of $83.3 million. Trump invoked the Supreme Court's recent immunity decision Trump's appeal brief calls the case "a miscarriage of justice" and says the Second Circuit got it wrong. "Presidential immunity shields from liability President Trump's public statements issued in his official capacity through official White House channels," they wrote in a brief. Carroll's attorney Roberta Kaplan argued in her own brief that presidential immunity — like all other forms of immunity in the American legal system — can be waived. "If there were ever a case where immunity does not shield a President's speech, this one is it," she wrote. "Donald Trump was not speaking here about a governmental policy or a function of his responsibilities as President. He was defaming Carroll because of her revelation that many years before he assumed office, he sexually assaulted her." John Sauer, who argued the immunity case on Trump's behalf before the Supreme Court, also filed appeal briefs in the Carroll case. In September, Sauer urged the Second Circuit in an oral argument to toss the jury verdict against Trump in the first Carroll trial, in part because it featured testimony from other women who said Trump sexually abused them. The court upheld that verdict earlier this month. Sauer is now serving as the Justice Department's solicitor general in the second Trump administration. And on Wednesday, the court denied a motion from the Justice Department to take over Trump's defense. Court filings indicate Justin D. Smith, a Missouri-based attorney at Sauer's former law firm, will argue against Kaplan at Tuesday's hearing. Smith didn't respond to a request for comment from Business Insider. In two of Trump's other high-profile appeals, Trump has retained the Big Law firm Sullivan & Cromwell. They're fighting a half-billion-dollar civil fraud judgment against the Trump Organization as well as a Manhattan jury verdict that found Trump guilty of 34 counts of falsifying business documents as part of the Stormy Daniels hush-money scandal. In the criminal case, Sullivan & Cromwell — which argued their appeal before the Second Circuit earlier this month — also leans heavily on the Supreme Court's immunity decision. In that case, Trump's lawyers said additional arguments should be held in federal courts, not state courts, which would make future decisions easier to appeal directly to the Supreme Court.
NBC News
11-06-2025
- NBC News
More accusations added to federal sex trafficking case against Alexander brothers
Three real estate brothers accused of a scheme to sex traffic women across multiple states and Mexico were in a federal courtroom in New York on Tuesday to face a third superseding indictment. An added count against Alon Alexander and Oren Alexander brings the total to 10 counts against Oren Alexander, Tal Alexander and Alon Alexander. They pleaded not guilty to all charges. The brothers appeared in hand and leg shackles, wearing olive-colored prison attire. They greeted their parents on their way in and out of the brief arraignment. Federal prosecutors have accused the men of working together to drug, sexually assault and rape dozens of victims between 2009 and 2021. The charges allege that the brothers promised women luxury experiences to lure them to locations where they were sexually assaulted and raped. Seven victims are included in the indictment, including a minor. Federal prosecutors have said they have spoken to more than 60 alleged victims of the men. The new count alleges that Alon and Oren gave a drug, intoxicant or another substance to a woman without her knowledge to cause her to engage in a sex act while on a Bahamian cruise ship that departed from and arrived in the United States. An attorney for Alon, Howard Srebnick, said that his client had not drugged a woman to have sex with her. "On January 13, 2025, a retired FBI polygraph examiner tested Alon while in jail. Alon was asked if he ever had sex with any woman he knew had been covertly given drugs, which Alon denied," Srebnick said. "The polygraph examiner opined that Alon passed the lie detector test, there were 'no significant reactions indicative of deception' by Alon." Attorneys for the other men either declined to comment Tuesday. Earlier on Tuesday, attorneys for the three brothers appeared at the Second Circuit Court of Appeals to appeal their detention at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, where they have been held since last December. "They did not agree to provide sex in exchange for the travel or accommodations,' defense attorney Deanna Paul for Tal Alexander wrote in a dismissal motion filed Monday in the Southern District of New York in Manhattan. "The alleged travel and accommodations were not conditioned expressly, or implicitly, on the victims' participation in the sex acts; and the travel and accommodations did not represent compensation for the sex acts,' the motion states, citing four separate federal court decisions on the sex trafficking law requiring that connection to hold up. Their next hearing is set for Aug 19. The Alexander brothers filed a defamation lawsuit this week against The Real Deal, a real estate publication, seeking $500 million in damages for what they say has been a 'smear campaign' against them that 'has relentlessly published articles containing false and misleading statements'. The Real Deal strongly rejected those allegations. "Let's be clear: this lawsuit is not about justice. It's an attempt to stop investigative journalism and bully a newsroom for doing its job,' founder and publisher Amir Korangy said in a statement Tuesday. 'The Real Deal's reporting was fair and conscientious, and we are confident the courts will see this for what it is — a frivolous and cynical attempt to weaponize the legal system."
