Donald Trump’s legal team is hitting the brakes on that eye-popping $83.3 million defamation judgment in favor of E. Jean Carroll — and they’re aiming straight for the Supreme Court to do it.
In a late-night filing, Trump’s attorneys asked a federal appeals court to freeze enforcement of the massive verdict while they tee up a high-stakes appeal centered on a familiar Trump-world argument: presidential immunity. They say actions taken while Trump sat in the Oval Office shouldn’t come with a personal bill attached.
Carroll’s side isn’t even fighting the pause. The writer’s legal team is willing to stand down, so long as Trump sweetens the pot with roughly $7.46 million more to cover interest while the case lingers in legal limbo. In other words: delay is fine, but the meter’s still running.
Trump lawyer Justin Smith didn’t mince words in the filing, urging the court to “stay the mandate” so the Supreme Court can weigh in on what he framed as major constitutional questions, “including, without limitation, Presidential immunity and the Westfall Act.”
If that sounds like legal jargon, here’s the gist: the Westfall Act is a federal law that can shift liability from a government official to Uncle Sam — but only if the conduct in question falls within the scope of the job. Trump’s team argues his statements about Carroll back in 2019 qualify. Critics, unsurprisingly, say that’s a stretch. The stakes? Enormous.
The judgment stems from a May 2023 decision, when a jury concluded Trump defamed Carroll — a case that’s been politically radioactive from the start, unfolding as Trump eyed another White House run and battled a growing list of legal headaches.
Now, his lawyers insist there’s a “reasonable probability” the Supreme Court will take the case — and a “fair prospect” they’ll win. They’re leaning heavily on dissenting judges from the Second Circuit who flagged what they see as serious legal missteps, especially on whether Trump waived immunity protections.
“Absent a stay, President Trump will suffer ongoing irreparable harm,” Smith argued, warning that enforcement efforts could kick in before the high court even has a chance to weigh the case.
And that’s the real fear for Team Trump: pay now, maybe win later — and possibly never see that money again.
Their argument goes further, cautioning that allowing the judgment to proceed during Supreme Court review would “eviscerate” the very concept of presidential immunity. In other words, if former presidents can be dragged through personal liability for official statements, the office itself could take a hit. That’s the constitutional showdown they’re banking on.
Meanwhile, the clock is ticking — and so is the interest. Whether the Supreme Court bites is anyone’s guess. But if it does, expect fireworks. This isn’t just about one verdict anymore — it’s about how far presidential power stretches once the job is over. And, of course, who picks up the tab.
