Published July 28, 2026 at 11:14 PM ET · Updated July 29, 2026 at 10:12 PM ET
Trump Justice Department asks Supreme Court to throw out E. Jean Carroll suit
3 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 Trump Justice Department appealed the E. Jean Carroll lawsuit to the Supreme Court, asking it to overturn an $83 million verdict. Trump is seeking to have the high court reverse the judgment against him.
Patriot Watch first flagged this story 23 hr ago, when Washington Post reported it. Coverage has since grown to 3 independent outlets, including 1 wire/mainstream feed. The most recent report came 3 hr ago from Breitbart. Verification tier: Confirmed — reported independently by wire/mainstream and conservative outlets.
⚖ The Constitutional Angle
Under Nixon v. Fitzgerald a former President has absolute immunity from civil damages for acts within the outer perimeter of his duties. But Clinton v. Jones held a President has no immunity for unofficial conduct, including conduct predating the presidency. The DOJ bid to erase the verdict turns on whether Trump's statements were official or unofficial acts.
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.
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.
Precedent facts from the PW Law Library — primary-source verified & independently audited
