Supreme Court Declines Trump Appeal in E. Jean Carroll Case; DOJ Launches Funding Investigation

Supreme Court Ruling on Carroll Case

The Supreme Court issued a brief order on June 29, 2026, declining to review the 2023 jury verdict finding President Donald Trump liable for sexually abusing and defaming writer E. Jean Carroll. No explanation was provided, and no justice publicly dissented.

Key Ruling: The nation's highest court declined to hear Trump's appeal, leaving the jury's $5 million verdict intact.

The Verdict

In May 2023, a New York federal jury found Trump liable for sexually abusing Carroll in a Manhattan department store dressing room in the mid-1990s and for defaming her in 2022 when he denied her allegations. The jury awarded Carroll $5 million in damages.

Appeal Arguments

Trump's legal team argued the trial was unfair because the judge allowed testimony from two other women who alleged sexual misconduct by Trump. They contended the evidence violated federal rules and distracted from Trump's duties.

Lower Court Ruling

A three-judge panel at the Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the verdict in December 2024, citing a "repeated, idiosyncratic pattern of conduct" consistent with Carroll's allegations.

Separate Defamation Verdict

In January 2024, a second jury ordered Trump to pay Carroll $83.3 million in a separate defamation case related to statements he made in 2019. Trump is appealing that verdict. A federal appeals court has ruled that Trump does not need to pay the $83.3 million judgment while the appeal is pending, requiring him to post a $7.46 million bond to cover potential interest. Trump has indicated he intends to seek Supreme Court review of that case.

Statements

Trump wrote on Truth Social that the court declined to review a "Fake Case brought against me." Carroll's attorney, Roberta Kaplan, said the decision "affirms once and for all the jury's unanimous verdict."

Department of Justice Investigation into Legal Funding

The U.S. Department of Justice has initiated an investigation related to the funding of Carroll's legal fees during her civil lawsuits against Trump. The probe is being led by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Illinois.

Scope of Investigation

The investigation focuses on the funding of Carroll's legal fees. Initial reports indicated it was a perjury investigation into Carroll, based on a 2022 deposition statement regarding outside funding for her lawsuit. However, U.S. Attorney Andrew Boutros stated on May 29, 2026, that his office "has not opened and has never opened a criminal investigation into E Jean Carroll."

The investigation reportedly targets American Future Republic, a nonprofit founded by LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman, examining whether its funding of Carroll's legal fees involved potential crimes including money laundering, conspiracy, and obstruction. Tax records show American Future Republic provided $7 million to the law firm representing Carroll in 2020.

Legal Funding Details

During a 2022 deposition, Carroll testified that she received no outside funding for her lawsuit. Her lawyers later disclosed that Hoffman's organization had paid some of her legal bills. In 2024, the Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found that Carroll had "plausibly represented" she forgot about the limited outside funding when the question was posed and that additional discovery did not indicate otherwise.

Recusal

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has recused himself from the investigation due to his prior work as one of Trump's personal attorneys on the Carroll appeals.

Statements

Reid Hoffman stated on X (formerly Twitter) that Trump is investigating him because he supported Carroll's lawsuit, calling the investigation "fraudulent" and stating he will not "bend the knee." Hoffman also characterized the investigation as an effort to "silence those who stand up to him."

Representatives for Hoffman, Carroll, and the White House did not respond to requests for comment. The Justice Department declined to comment.

Context of Other Supreme Court Rulings

On the same day, the Supreme Court issued rulings on other cases related to presidential power and voting procedures.

Presidential Removal Power

• In a 6-3 decision, the court overturned a 1935 precedent (Humphrey's Executor v. United States) and ruled that the president has the authority to fire members of independent government agencies, including commissioners of the Federal Trade Commission, without cause.
• However, in a 5-4 decision, the court blocked President Trump from firing Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, ruling that the Federal Reserve Act requires cause for removal.

Mail-In Voting

In a 5-4 decision, the court upheld a Mississippi law that allows mail-in ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted if received within five business days after the election.