{"id":17834,"date":"2026-01-17T09:22:09","date_gmt":"2026-01-17T09:22:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/bluelightnews.com\/category\/politics\/e-jean-carroll-fights-against-supreme-court-review-of-trumps-appeal\/"},"modified":"2026-01-17T09:22:09","modified_gmt":"2026-01-17T09:22:09","slug":"e-jean-carroll-fights-against-supreme-court-review-of-trumps-appeal","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/bluelightnews.com\/category\/politics\/e-jean-carroll-fights-against-supreme-court-review-of-trumps-appeal\/","title":{"rendered":"E. Jean Carroll fights against Supreme Court review of Trump\u2019s appeal"},"content":{"rendered":"<div>\n<p><strong>Welcome back, Deadline: Legal Newsletter readers.<\/strong>Supreme Court justices were back on the bench holding hearings this week, most prominently in the appeal over&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.ms.now\/deadline-white-house\/deadline-legal-blog\/transgender-athletes-supreme-court-arguments-west-virginia-idaho-trump\">bans on transgender women and girls in sports<\/a>. They also issued&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/opinions\/slipopinion\/25\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">three rulings<\/a>including one that could&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.ms.now\/deadline-white-house\/deadline-legal-blog\/bost-supreme-court-mail-voting-jackson-dissent\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">open &ldquo;the floodgates&rdquo;<\/a> to election lawsuits,&nbsp;according to the dissent. But despite another&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.cnbc.com\/2026\/01\/14\/supreme-court-trump-tariffs-decision.html\">day of anticipation<\/a>the tariffs ruling wasn&rsquo;t in the latest batch of opinions.<\/p>\n<p><strong>While Donald Trump&rsquo;s administration argued<\/strong>in the name of defending women in sports, litigation over his civil liability for sexual abuse unfolded behind the scenes. He&rsquo;s trying to reverse&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.ms.now\/deadline-white-house\/deadline-legal-blog\/e-jean-carroll-trial-trump-lies-truth-social-testimony-rcna83539\">the $5 million in damages awarded<\/a>by a New York City jury that found he abused and defamed writer&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.ms.now\/deadline-white-house\/deadline-legal-blog\/trump-asks-supreme-court-reverse-e-jean-carroll-verdict-calls-flawed-rcna243198\">E. Jean Carroll<\/a>. Her lawyers filed their opposition brief to the justices on Wednesday, urging the high court to stay out of it.<\/p>\n<p><strong>To understand the arguments Trump and Carroll are making,<\/strong>here&rsquo;s a quick refresher on how the justices decide which cases to take up. They receive thousands of petitions annually and have been granting review in fewer than 60 cases a term. Generally speaking, they&rsquo;re&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.law.cornell.edu\/rules\/supct\/rule_10\">looking for<\/a>legal issues that raise important questions and have divided the country&rsquo;s lower courts &mdash; creating &ldquo;circuit splits&rdquo; &mdash; and thus can benefit from a nationwide resolution.<\/p>\n<p><strong>That&rsquo;s why Trump&rsquo;s petition <\/strong>argued&nbsp;that <a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/DocketPDF\/25\/25-573\/384069\/20251110150010381_PetitionandAppendix.pdf\">his appeal presents<\/a> an &ldquo;important question of federal law&rdquo; that implicates circuit splits. The gist of his claim is that the trial judge wrongly admitted evidence against him, including the infamous&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.ms.now\/deadline-white-house\/deadline-legal-blog\/trump-access-hollywood-tape-e-jean-carroll-defamation-trial-rcna74840\">&ldquo;Access Hollywood&rdquo; tape<\/a>in which he bragged about grabbing women by their genitals. He argues that the <a href=\"https:\/\/storage.courtlistener.com\/recap\/gov.uscourts.ca2.60504\/gov.uscourts.ca2.60504.176.1_1.pdf\">approval of<\/a>the tape&rsquo;s admission by the 2nd Circuit conflicted with the way that other federal appeals courts handle evidentiary issues.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Carroll unsurprisingly contests Trump&rsquo;s framing<\/strong>of the case, both factually and legally. Factually, her lawyers&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/DocketPDF\/25\/25-573\/391707\/20260114134101852_25-573BriefinOpposition.pdf\">wrote that<\/a>the president&rsquo;s &ldquo;entire petition&rdquo; is based on the &ldquo;misstatement of fact&rdquo; that she falsely accused him of sexual assault; they went on to detail what the jury found that Trump did to her in a luxury department store dressing room in 1996. Legally, among their opposition arguments is that there&rsquo;s no &ldquo;genuine circuit split&rdquo; and that his lawyers failed to challenge the 2nd Circuit&rsquo;s ruling that he didn&rsquo;t show how any error affected his &ldquo;substantial rights.&rdquo; They called the latter failure a &ldquo;fatal defect&rdquo; for his petition.<\/p>\n<p><strong>We don&rsquo;t know yet what the court will do<\/strong>. Trump&rsquo;s lawyers can file a reply brief making a final pitch to the justices, who will then decide whether to grant review. It takes four justices to do so.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Next week, guns and Federal Reserve independence<\/strong>are on the court&rsquo;s calendar, with hearings on those topics scheduled&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/docket\/docketfiles\/html\/public\/24-1046.html\">for Tuesday<\/a>and Wednesday, respectively. The latter hearing is over Trump&rsquo;s&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.ms.now\/deadline-white-house\/deadline-legal-blog\/supreme-court-lisa-cook-federal-reserve-board-trump-rcna232182\">bid to fire Lisa Cook<\/a>from the Fed&rsquo;s Board of Governors. As I&nbsp;wrote this week, news of the Trump Justice Department&rsquo;s apparently bogus investigation of Fed Chair Jerome Powell <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ms.now\/deadline-white-house\/deadline-legal-blog\/powell-doj-probe-supreme-court-federal-reserve-lisa-cook\">isn&rsquo;t likely to help<\/a> the administration, because the court&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.ms.now\/deadline-white-house\/deadline-legal-blog\/supreme-court-trump-firing-agency-leaders-deadline-newsletter-rcna208789\">has already signaled<\/a>its desire to protect the central bank&rsquo;s independence &mdash; at least to a greater degree than the justices are protecting&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.ms.now\/deadline-white-house\/deadline-legal-blog\/trump-v-slaughter-supreme-court-humphreys\">other federal agencies<\/a>. They didn&rsquo;t need a reminder of how much that Fed independence is needed, but the administration just gave them one.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The court also flagged Tuesday<\/strong>as the next day it will release at least one more opinion in a case argued this term. So, we&rsquo;ll be back on watch that morning for the tariffs ruling, or whatever else might come.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Have any questions or comments for me? Please<\/strong><a href=\"https:\/\/forms.gle\/yu1hktYmMu36xpa48\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><strong>submit them through this form<\/strong><\/a><strong>for a chance to be featured in the Deadline: Legal Blog and newsletter.<\/strong><strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div>\n<p>Jordan&nbsp;Rubin is the Deadline: Legal Blog writer. He was a prosecutor for the New York County District Attorney&rsquo;s Office in Manhattan&nbsp;and is the author of &ldquo;Bizarro,&#8221; a book about the secret war on synthetic drugs. Before he joined MS NOW, he was a legal reporter for Bloomberg Law.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.ms.now\/deadline-white-house\/deadline-legal-blog\/e-jean-carroll-supreme-court-deadline-newsletter\" class=\"button purchase\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\" target=\"_blank\">Read More<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Welcome back, Deadline: Legal Newsletter readers.Supreme Court justices were back on the bench holding hearings this week, most prominently in the appeal over&nbsp;bans on transgender women and girls in sports. They also issued&nbsp;three rulingsincluding one that could&nbsp;open &ldquo;the floodgates&rdquo; to election lawsuits,&nbsp;according to the dissent. But despite another&nbsp;day of anticipationthe tariffs ruling wasn&rsquo;t in the [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":17835,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-17834","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-trump"],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/bluelightnews.com\/category\/politics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17834","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/bluelightnews.com\/category\/politics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/bluelightnews.com\/category\/politics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bluelightnews.com\/category\/politics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bluelightnews.com\/category\/politics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=17834"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/bluelightnews.com\/category\/politics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17834\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bluelightnews.com\/category\/politics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/17835"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/bluelightnews.com\/category\/politics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=17834"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bluelightnews.com\/category\/politics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=17834"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bluelightnews.com\/category\/politics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=17834"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}