Intelligence. Accountability. Analysis.
Est. 2022 · Washington, D.C.
The Congressional Times
We follow the data, not the narrative
◆ Live Intelligence
Loading...
Analysis Loading today's analysis...
Legal Intelligence

Trump Petitions Supreme Court to Vacate $83.3 Million Carroll Defamation Award

The petition places a jury-determined damages award under Supreme Court review, a procedural step that could define the legal boundaries between presidential speech and defamation liability.

The Congressional Times · July 28, 2026

President Donald Trump has filed a petition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the $83.3 million damages award a federal jury ordered him to pay to writer E. Jean Carroll in January 2024, according to reporting by The New York Times dated July 28, 2026. The petition represents a formal request for certiorari, the next available appellate avenue after lower federal courts declined to set aside the verdict.

The 2024 award stems from a defamation case in which the jury found Trump liable for statements he made about Carroll in 2019, after she publicly accused him of sexual assault. That verdict was separate from an earlier 2023 case in which a different jury found Trump liable for battery and defamation, resulting in a $5 million award. Court records confirm Trump paid the $5 million judgment from the 2023 case; the status of payment or bonding arrangements for the $83.3 million 2024 award has not been publicly disclosed in available court filings as of this report's publication date.

Trump's legal team has argued, in filings before lower courts, that the damages were excessive and that certain evidentiary rulings prejudiced the trial. U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan, who presided over the case in the Southern District of New York, and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals both declined to disturb the verdict. The Supreme Court petition is the final domestic judicial recourse available to Trump under standard appellate procedure.

Carroll's legal team has previously maintained that the damages reflect the scope and duration of the defamatory statements and their impact on Carroll's reputation and professional standing. The Supreme Court has discretion over whether to accept the case; it agrees to hear roughly 1 to 2 percent of petitions filed each term, according to Supreme Court records.

Several material facts remain unknown from available public records. The precise legal arguments contained in the Supreme Court petition have not been reproduced in full in publicly accessible court dockets as of July 28, 2026. It is also unknown whether the Court has requested a response from Carroll's counsel or placed the petition on a conference schedule. The Supreme Court's docket — available at supremecourt.gov — would be the authoritative source to confirm petition number, response deadlines, and any conference dates.

Today's Analysis
Loading...
Latest Intelligence
Congressional Intelligence
Loading...
Financial Intelligence
Loading...
Geopolitical Intelligence
Loading...
Follow the MoneyGab-E Political Intelligence Investigation
Loading...
Opinion & Analysis
Loading...
Archive
Loading...
About
Our Mission

We Follow the Data, Not the Narrative

The Congressional Times exists because public records are public — and the analysis built from them should not be exclusive to those who can afford $60,000-a-year intelligence subscriptions.

Every story published in The Congressional Times is sourced to a verifiable public record: a court filing, a Senate lobbying disclosure, an FEC contribution record, a USASpending contract, or a verified news report. We state our sources inline. We show our math. When we are wrong, we say so publicly.

We do not editorialize in news coverage. We do not use loaded language. Both political parties are held to identical standards.

The Follow the Money investigations are the heart of this publication. Each begins with Gab-E Political Intelligence running against 10+ million government records before a single word of editorial is written.

Powered by Gab-E, an elite global intelligence platform built to democratize political and financial intelligence.

Editorial Policy
Editorial Standards & Corrections Policy

How We Source, Verify, and Correct Our Work

Every factual claim in a Congressional Times story is checked against a primary source: a government filing, a court record, a direct quote, before publication. When a claim can't be verified or doesn't hold up as originally reported, we drop it or reframe it. We do not publish disputed claims as settled fact.

When we get it wrong: we correct the story directly, note the correction and date at the bottom of the piece, and update the record. We do not quietly edit and move on.

Bylines: stories with a named byline are written and fact-checked by that person. Stories without a byline are sourced from Gab-E Political Intelligence, our automated research platform, and are labeled as such.

Ownership: The Congressional Times is published by Gab-E Holdings LLC. Gab-E, our intelligence platform, powers our sourcing and research pipeline.

Corrections or concerns: support@gab-e.com