Judge Denies Delay in $83M Trump Defamation Judgment

This article was written with the help of A.I. software.

A federal judge denied former President Donald Trump's request to delay enforcement and ordered him to pay E. Jean Carroll $83.3M.Photo byauthor (licensed under CC BY 2.0)

On Thursday, a federal judge denied former President Trump's plea to postpone the $83.3 million judgment in E. Jean Carroll's defamation lawsuit.

The judge refused to grant Trump additional time to provide a bond, even with the deadline quickly approaching.

Trump, the potential Republican nominee, is facing challenges in delaying judgments in both Carroll's case and the New York attorney general's extensive fraud investigation.

With potential penalties totaling hundreds of millions in the two civil cases, Trump is navigating a legal battle that could have significant financial implications.

Thursday's court decision represents a setback for Trump as it upholds the default rules allowing the enforcement of the judgment in Carroll's lawsuit as early as next week.

This effectively sets a deadline for Trump to post a bond. U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan attributed Trump's current predicament to his own delaying tactics in the legal proceedings.

Trump was ordered by a federal jury in New York to pay a substantial amount to Carroll for defaming her after she accused him of sexual assault in 2019.

Another jury had previously found Trump guilty of sexually abusing the advice columnist as well.

Trump's legal team has indicated that the bond amount required for appealing the January verdict would be $91.63 million.

Despite Trump's efforts to seek a new trial or reduce the damages, the judge has not yet ruled on these requests.

In the meantime, the judge has rejected Trump's request to delay the judgment further, maintaining the imminent deadline for posting the bond.

This is a continuation of a totally lawless witch hunt,” Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung said in a statement. “President Trump filed a timely motion to stay the ridiculous judgment, and many courts, including the Second Circuit, recognize the importance of temporary administrative stays while such motions are considered. We look forward to continuing to litigate the case and to complete vindication of the truth.

Carroll’s legal team objected to the ex-president’s plea for a postponement in delivering the verdict or a lesser bond, citing doubts about Trump's willingness to make payments.

Their response highlighted Trump's appeal to the court to take him at his word, despite facing an $83.3 million judgment and submitting a document lacking credibility in financial matters.

The attorneys emphasized the untrustworthiness of Trump as a borrower in their message to the presiding judge.

Trump's legal team countered by calling attention to Carroll's strategy of emphasizing Trump's own wealth claims in an attempt to increase the total damages sought.

Alina Habba and D. John Sauer, representing Trump, criticized Carroll's lawyers for their perceived disregard for accuracy in presenting the facts.

D. John Sauer joined the legal team following the trial and is also involved in Trump's defense against accusations of subverting the federal election and challenging a gag order issued in connection with that case.