A federal appeals court has upheld the jury verdict that found Donald Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation in the civil case brought by writer E. Jean Carroll. The ruling preserves the $5 million award and rejects Trump’s argument that the trial court made errors serious enough to warrant another hearing.
The decision came from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which said Trump had not shown that the district court erred in any of the rulings he challenged. The panel also said he failed to prove that any alleged mistakes affected his substantial rights, which is the standard he needed to meet to obtain a new trial. In practical terms, the judges left intact the earlier finding that Trump sexually abused Carroll and later defamed her.
The appeal focused in part on evidence from two other women who said Trump had assaulted them as well. Trump’s lawyers argued that the testimony should have been excluded, but the appeals court said the evidence could be admitted for purposes such as showing motive, intent, plan and lack of accident. The court also upheld the use of the “Access Hollywood” tape, saying a jury could reasonably see Trump’s comments as relevant to the allegations in Carroll’s case.
Carroll’s legal team welcomed the ruling and said the panel had carefully considered the arguments. Trump’s side, by contrast, said it would continue to fight the case. The ruling does not end the broader legal conflict between the former president and Carroll, but it does close off one major route to undoing the $5 million award.
The underlying lawsuit centres on Carroll’s claim that Trump assaulted her in a department-store dressing room in the 1990s and then attacked her credibility years later after she went public. Trump has denied the allegations, called the lawsuit politically motivated and sought to overturn the civil findings through appeal. The trial judge, Lewis Kaplan, allowed the jury to hear testimony from the two other women and to consider the recording in which Trump described kissing women without consent and grabbing them.
The appeals panel’s opinion matters because it signals that the trial judge’s evidentiary decisions were within the broad discretion courts have in civil cases involving sexual assault allegations. That point was central to Trump’s argument: his lawyers said the jury had been exposed to unfairly prejudicial material. The panel disagreed, effectively saying the contested evidence had a legitimate purpose in helping jurors assess pattern and credibility.
The ruling also sits alongside a separate, much larger Carroll verdict. A second federal jury awarded her $83.3 million for statements Trump made in 2019 after she first came forward publicly. Trump is still appealing that award. Together, the two cases have become a major legal and political headache for the former president, even as he continues to contest the findings and maintain his innocence.
The ruling leaves intact the jury's verdict while underscoring how much appellate courts defer to trial judges on evidence. In a case as politically charged as this one, that standard makes it difficult to undo a verdict absent a clear legal error. The panel's decision therefore matters not only for Carroll's award but also for the larger legal strategy Trump has used in other civil and criminal fights.
