Published July 28, 2026 at 11:14 PM ET · Updated July 29, 2026 at 10:06 AM ET
Justice Department and Trump ask Supreme Court to overturn $83 million Carroll verdict
2 independent outlets are covering this story. Verification: Confirmed — reported independently by wire/mainstream and conservative outlets. Patriot Watch links to original reporting; we don't republish it.
The Justice Department and President Trump petitioned the Supreme Court to review the $83.3 million verdict in the E. Jean Carroll case. They are seeking to overturn the verdict.
Patriot Watch first flagged this story 12 hr ago, when Washington Post reported it. Coverage has since grown to 2 independent outlets, including 1 wire/mainstream feed. The most recent report came 2 hr ago from ZeroHedge. Verification tier: Confirmed — reported independently by wire/mainstream and conservative outlets.
⚖ The Constitutional Angle
Clinton v. Jones held that a President has no immunity from civil suits for unofficial conduct, including acts predating his presidency. Nixon v. Fitzgerald supplies the flip side: a former President is absolutely immune only for acts within the outer perimeter of official duties. The Carroll verdict therefore stands unless Trump can show the conduct fell within those official duties.
Clinton v. Jones 520 U.S. 681 (1997)
Vote: 9-0 · Opinion: Stevens
A sitting President has no immunity — not even temporary immunity — from civil litigation in federal court over unofficial conduct, including conduct predating the presidency. Separation-of-powers principles do not require a categorical stay: the doctrine does not bar every exercise of jurisdiction over the President, and Fitzgerald's rationale (protecting official decisionmaking) 'provides no support for an immunity for unofficial conduct.' District courts retain ordinary case-management discretion to accommodate the President's schedule.
Nixon v. Fitzgerald 457 U.S. 731 (1982)
Vote: 5-4 · Opinion: Powell
A former President 'is entitled to absolute immunity from damages liability predicated on his official acts,' extending 'to all acts within the "outer perimeter" of his duties of office.' The immunity is 'a functionally mandated incident of his unique office, rooted in the constitutional tradition of the separation of powers and supported by the Nation's history.' Remaining safeguards include impeachment, press scrutiny, congressional oversight, and concern for reelection and historical stature.
Precedent facts from the PW Law Library — primary-source verified & independently audited
