Trump has not won a ruling that presidential immunity protects his 2019 statements about E. Jean Carroll.
Lower courts instead held that he raised the defense too late, and the Supreme Court must now decide whether to review the $83.3 million judgment. Presidential immunity here means Trump's proposed defense that his statements were protected as official presidential conduct. The key unresolved question is whether courts should ever reach that issue after he omitted the defense from his original answer.
Table of Contents
- Why are there two Carroll cases?
- How did the verdicts and appeals unfold?
- Why did Trump lose the immunity argument below?
- What did the courts not decide?
- What happens next?
Why are there two Carroll cases?
Carroll filed her first lawsuit, known as Carroll I, in 2019. It seeks damages for trump's white House-era denials of her allegation that he assaulted her. Carroll II followed in 2022.
It added a battery claim under New York's Adult Survivors Act and a defamation claim based on later Trump statements. A Supreme Court filing describing the litigation outlines that distinction. The two cases concern related conduct, but they produced separate verdicts and appeals. That difference matters because only Carroll I remains a possible vehicle for Supreme Court review of Trump's immunity argument.
How did the verdicts and appeals unfold?
In May 2023, a Manhattan federal jury found Trump liable in carroll II for sexually abusing Carroll and defaming her through October 2022 statements. It awarded $5 million. The jury did not find rape under New York's then-applicable statutory definition. That limitation is important when describing the verdict, although it does not change the jury's sexual-abuse finding.
In january 2024, a second jury awarded Carroll $83.3 million in Carroll I. That award addressed damages from Trump's 2019 attacks on her credibility. The court instructed the jury to accept the first jury's sexual-abuse finding rather than decide that issue again. The Second Circuit affirmed the $83.3 million judgment on September 8, 2025. The full appeals court denied rehearing on April 29, 2026.
Why did Trump lose the immunity argument below?
Trump did not include presidential immunity in his original answer to Carroll's 2019 complaint. He attempted to add the defense later. In December 2023, the Second Circuit held that presidential immunity can be waived.
It concluded that Trump had waived it and upheld the decision striking the late-added defense, according to the federal court decision addressing waiver. The appeals court adhered to that ruling when it affirmed the judgment. It also upheld the compensatory and punitive damages awards.
What did the courts not decide?
The Second Circuit did not decide whether Trump's 2019 statements were official presidential acts protected by immunity. It treated the defense as already waived and that earlier determination as binding, as reflected in its April 2026 rehearing order.
That distinction limits what the lower-court rulings establish. They do not stand for a broad rule that presidential immunity can never cover statements made while a president is in office. The dispute instead turns on timing and procedure: whether Trump forfeited the defense by failing to raise it initially, and whether the Supreme Court should review that treatment.
What happens next?
Trump filed a Supreme Court petition on July 28, 2026, seeking review of the Carroll I judgment and its immunity treatment. As of August 18, Carroll's response is due August 31, according to the Supreme Court docket for the pending petition. The next practical event is the Court's decision on whether to hear the case.
Filing a petition does not mean the Court has accepted the appeal, and no merits argument or ruling is scheduled. Carroll II is no longer the live immunity vehicle. The Supreme Court denied Trump's petition concerning that $5 million case on June 29, 2026, and later rejected his request to reconsider that refusal, as shown on the separate Carroll II docket.