E. Jean Carroll’s Case Against Trump Explained

How It Started: Carroll wrote in a June 2019 New York Magazine article excerpting her book that Trump raped her in a dressing room at Bergdorf Goodman in the 1990s—but Trump denied the allegations, saying, “I’ve never met this person in my life,” Carroll is “not my type,” and the incident “never happened.”

The Lawsuit: Carroll then sued Trump for defamation as a result of his comments in November 2019, alleging the then-president’s reaction to her allegations caused her “emotional pain and suffering at the hands of the man who raped her, as well as injury to her reputation, honor and dignity.”

What She’s Asking For: Carroll’s lawsuit asks for an unspecified amount of monetary damages, which would be determined at trial, and for the court to order Trump to retract his allegedly defamatory statements.

Lawsuit Moves Forward: Carroll initially sued Trump in New York Supreme Court, where Justice Verna L. Saunders ruled in August 2020 that the case could move forward, rebuffing a request from Trump to put the case on hold while a separate defamation case against him, which also involved allegations of sexual misconduct, played out.

Government Steps In: The Justice Department (during the Trump Administration) moved the case to federal court in September 2020 and asked the court to substitute the government as the defendant in the case instead of Trump himself, arguing that Trump’s denials were made as part of his official role as president, and thus Carroll’s lawsuit should be against the United States and not Trump as a private citizen.

Why That Matters: If a court determines that Trump’s comments fell under the scope of his presidency and the federal government can be substituted as the defendant, it means Carroll’s case will almost certainly fail, the New York Times notes, as the government cannot be sued for defamation like individual citizens can.

Biden Administration Weighs In: While the government asked to intervene in the lawsuit when Trump was president, the Biden Administration hasn’t backed away from the case, and said in a court brief in June 2021 that while Trump’s comments were “crude and disrespectful” and Carroll’s allegations “cast doubt” on Trump’s “fitness for office,” it ultimately believes the comments fell into the scope of his employment as president and thus Carroll’s case should be dismissed.

What Courts Have Said: The federal district judge hearing the case rejected the government’s attempt to substitute itself for Trump in October 2020—an appeals court then threw out that ruling in September but didn’t decide whether Trump was actually acting within the scope of his employment, instead sending that question to a different appeals court in Washington, D.C., to decide (which remains pending).

Discovery In The Case: Carroll’s attorneys have accused Trump throughout the litigation of refusing to turn over documents and other materials as part of the discovery process—including his deposition—saying in a September letter to the court that while Trump has gotten thousands of documents from Carroll, he’s only turned over eight documents himself and has “stonewalled” their requests and “violated every deadline that applied to his discovery responses without any credible excuse for his failure.”

Trump’s Deposition: After U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan rebuffed Trump’s request to delay his deposition and discovery until the appeals court rules on the government intervening, Trump was deposed in the case on Wednesday, and his attorney Alina Habba said he answered questions in the deposition and did not invoke his Fifth Amendment rights (attorneys for Carroll said they were “pleased” to take Trump’s deposition but are unable to comment further).