In a tense courtroom showdown in Manhattan, Donald Trump found himself facing a panel of federal judges who seemed unconvinced by his arguments to overturn a $5 million verdict against him. The case revolves around accusations of sexual abuse and defamation made by E. Jean Carroll, one of Trump’s most prominent accusers. The jury had found Trump liable for these charges last year, specifically for an incident in the mid-1990s where he allegedly sexually assaulted Carroll in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room.
The judges on the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, all appointed by Democratic presidents, appeared skeptical of Trump’s efforts to overturn the May 2023 verdict. They specifically questioned the admissibility of key evidence: testimony from another woman, Jessica Leeds, who alleged Trump groped her on an airplane in 1979, and the notorious ‘Access Hollywood’ tape from 2005, in which Trump bragged about grabbing women without their consent.
Trump’s attorney, D. John Sauer, argued that the case was a simple “he said, she said” scenario and accused Carroll of having a political motive in bringing the lawsuit. Sauer attempted to discredit Leeds’s testimony, arguing that no federal law against sexual assault on an airplane existed at the time of the alleged incident. However, Carroll’s lawyer, Roberta Kaplan, countered that a law prohibiting “simple assault” was in effect then, emphasizing that “It was a crime then to grope someone on a plane. It is a crime today to grope someone on a plane.”
Sauer also contested the relevance of the ‘Access Hollywood’ tape, claiming it didn’t refer to any specific incident and shouldn’t be considered a “confession.” Judge Denny Chin, however, countered that the tape was a “confession about a modus operandi,” implying a pattern of behavior. Sauer’s response, “modus operandi itself is inadmissible,” seemed to further solidify the judges’ skepticism.
The 20-minute hearing was marked by Trump’s stoic demeanor, remaining expressionless throughout the proceedings. As he left the courtroom, he refused to answer a reporter’s question about his satisfaction with the hearing. This legal battle continues to be closely watched as the judges deliberate on whether to uphold or overturn the previous verdict.
