Judge Orders Trump to Release $5.8M to E Jean Carroll After Supreme Court Refuses Appeal
A federal judge ordered Trump to release $5.8 million to E Jean Carroll after the Supreme Court declined to hear his appeal.
A federal judge has ordered Donald Trump to release $5.8 million held in connection with a 2023 jury verdict finding he sexually abused and defamed writer E Jean Carroll — ending his latest attempt to delay the payment. The order follows the Supreme Court's June 29 decision to decline review of Trump's appeal, closing off his last major avenue for contesting the judgment at the federal level. Trump had asked the presiding judge not to order the release of the funds, but that request was denied. The $5.8 million stems from a New York civil trial in which a jury concluded Trump had sexually abused Carroll and then defamed her after she publicly described the attack. The verdict was one of several civil legal judgments Trump has faced in New York courts. Trump's legal team had sought to keep the funds frozen while pursuing appeals, a strategy that required posting a bond or holding money in reserve. With the Supreme Court declining to intervene, the lower court moved to finalize the release of those funds to Carroll.
Why it matters
The ruling represents the conclusion of Trump's appellate efforts on this particular judgment, meaning Carroll will receive the awarded damages. It also marks one of the first completed financial resolutions of the major civil verdicts Trump has faced.
Key facts
- The judgment amount is $5.8 million, awarded to E Jean Carroll
- A New York jury in 2023 found Trump had sexually abused Carroll and defamed her
- The Supreme Court declined to review Trump's appeal on June 29
- Trump requested the judge not order the funds released, but the judge denied that request
- The funds had been held pending the outcome of Trump's appeals process
Bias & framing notes
All three sources are from The Guardian, which limits independent corroboration. The reporting is consistent across the three articles, but the lack of additional outlets means the trust score is moderated. The Guardian's framing is straightforward and procedural, with no notable slant detected across the three pieces.