In his latest legal maneuver, former President Donald Trump’s is pushing the boundaries of presidential immunity further by arguing that his defamation of E. Jean Carroll should be considered an “official act,” and the civil judgments against him should be dismissed.
Trump’s claim emerges following the Supreme Court’s recent ruling affirming presidential immunity for actions deemed “official” while leaving the interpretation of such acts to lower courts.
The Supreme Court’s decision, which upheld immunity for certain presidential actions but not others, has significant implications. The ruling, which also restricted prosecutors from using certain executive branch evidence to prosecute Trump, has reinvigorated the former president’s efforts to dismiss legal challenges against him, including a Manhattan criminal conviction and election racketeering cases in Georgia. Now, Trump seeks to apply this immunity retroactively to nullify over $80 million in judgments against him from Carroll’s civil lawsuit.
In his filing, Trump argues that previous rulings, which rejected his immunity defense against allegedly defamatory remarks towards Carroll, did not correctly apply the presumption of immunity to what he deems “outer-perimeter” acts of his presidency.
Trump brief in Alvin Bragg case suggests SCOTUS immunity opinion might even blow up E. Jean Carroll verdict.https://t.co/CCEt1kysEF pic.twitter.com/SdW5Fje2tQ
— Jason Willick (@jawillick) July 12, 2024
Carroll’s lawsuit stems from her allegations that Trump raped her in a New York City department store in the 1990s. Trump’s denials and counterclaims led Carroll to file a defamation suit against him, seeking redress for the harm caused to her reputation and career.
Trump’s insistence that his statements regarding Carroll constitute “official acts” underscores a broader legal debate over the scope and limits of presidential authority and immunity. As the case remains under appeal, Trump’s maneuvering showcases ongoing efforts to leverage legal interpretations in his favor.
