President Donald Trump’s lawyers asked the Supreme Court to reconsider its refusal to hear his appeal of the $5 million civil judgment awarded to E. Jean Carroll. The court denied his petition on June 29 without taking up the case, and the new rehearing filing seeks to reopen that door.
The request matters because the judgment is tied to a 2023 jury verdict that found Trump liable for sexually abusing Carroll in the 1990s and defaming her. Trump has denied Carroll’s allegations, and the denial left the award in place. A separate article on the Supreme Court’s earlier rejection of the appeal explains why the case has already been closed once, but his lawyers are now asking the justices to revisit that decision.
In the filing, Trump’s counsel said he will imminently seek Supreme Court review in Carroll v. Trump, a different defamation case that they say will raise presidential immunity questions about official statements. They argue those questions are likely to affect the proper outcome in Trump v. Carroll, and asked the court either to grant rehearing or to hold this petition until the related case is resolved. The petition also cited the court’s 2024 immunity ruling in Trump v. United States as support for that position.
The rules Trump is relying on are narrow. After the court has already denied certiorari, rehearing is allowed only when there are intervening circumstances with a substantial or controlling effect, or other substantial grounds that were not previously presented. That is the hurdle his lawyers now have to clear, and it is a harder ask than the first appeal because the justices have already said no once.
There was also a procedural snag. The Supreme Court docket showed Trump’s first rehearing filing was not accepted on Monday because a correction was needed, and the corrected petition was submitted Wednesday. The court had not yet ruled on the request as of Wednesday.
A decision could come later this month, perhaps as soon as July 20. If the justices grant rehearing, they could either take up the case after all or pause it while the related Carroll appeal moves forward. If they do not, the June 29 denial stays in place and the $5 million judgment remains untouched.
