President Donald Trump has just been dealt a staggering $83.3 million blow by a federal appeals court for comments made on social media about columnist E. Jean Carroll.
Breitbart reported that the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a jury’s decision that Trump must pay this hefty sum for defaming Carroll over her allegations of a sexual assault from decades ago.
Let’s rewind to the early 1990s, when Carroll claims Trump assaulted her in a Manhattan department store around 1996, though no concrete evidence backs her story.
This accusation set the stage for years of legal battles. And while Trump has consistently denied any such encounter, the courts have not sided with his version of events.
In an earlier trial, Trump was found liable for sexually abusing Carroll and ordered to pay $5 million in damages. That decision was upheld by an appeals court last December, much to the frustration of those who see these cases as politically charged. Still, it laid the groundwork for the defamation case that followed.
The defamation saga centers on Trump’s repeated social media jabs at Carroll, which a Manhattan jury last year deemed worthy of an $83.3 million penalty.
Trump’s defense argued these were personal opinions, not actionable falsehoods, but the jury disagreed. It’s a hefty price tag for a few online posts, raising eyebrows among free speech advocates.
Trump’s legal team didn’t stop there, appealing the massive award and citing a Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity as a potential shield. They even pushed for a new trial, hoping to reset the narrative. But the appeals court wasn’t buying it, slamming the door on any reconsideration.
Speaking of the court’s ruling, the 2nd U.S. Circuit declared, “Jury’s damages awards are fair and reasonable.” Fair? Many Trump supporters might scoff at that, seeing this as another example of a legal system weaponized against a man who dares to challenge the progressive establishment.
The court doubled down, stating in its opinion that Trump failed to provide any solid basis for overturning prior holdings on immunity.
They also found no errors in the lower court’s rulings, leaving Trump’s team with little to stand on. For those skeptical of judicial overreach, this feels like a predetermined outcome.
Trump himself has been vocal, famously dismissing Carroll with the quip, “Not my type.” While that bluntness might resonate with his base, it’s the kind of off-the-cuff remark that fuels legal firestorms in today’s hyper-sensitive climate. Critics of cancel culture might argue he’s being punished more for his persona than his actions.
Adding fuel to the fire, Trump has accused Carroll of making up the entire story to boost book sales. It’s a theory that resonates with those who see personal gain behind many high-profile accusations against public figures. Yet, without hard proof, it remains just that—a theory.
That $83.3 million award isn’t just a number; it’s a signal to anyone in the public eye that words on social media can come with a crippling cost.
For conservatives, this feels like a chilling effect on free expression, especially when the accused is a lightning rod like Trump. The balance between accountability and silencing dissent seems dangerously tilted here.
Contrast that with the earlier $5 million penalty for the abuse finding, and you’ve got nearly $90 million in total damages against one man over one alleged incident from decades ago. Supporters might ask: where’s the proportionality in a system that seems to relish piling on penalties? It’s hard not to see this as a targeted campaign.
For many on the right, this case exemplifies how the legal system can be wielded to punish those who buck the progressive narrative. Trump’s unfiltered style, loved or loathed, is part of why millions rally behind him, yet it’s also why he’s constantly in the crosshairs. This ruling might make even the boldest voices think twice before posting.
While empathy is due to anyone claiming harm, the lack of hard evidence in Carroll’s accusation leaves room for reasonable doubt among fair-minded observers.
The court’s dismissal of Trump’s appeal, without apparent hesitation, only deepens the divide between those who see justice and those who see a witch hunt. It’s a tough pill for MAGA supporters to swallow.