Connect with us

News

Trump Has One Week To Pay $83.3 Million To E. Jean Carroll—And She’s Expressing ‘Very Serious Concerns’

Published

on

Trump Has One Week To Pay .3 Million To E. Jean Carroll—And She’s Expressing ‘Very Serious Concerns’

Topline

Former President Donald Trump’s scramble to cover millions in legal fines could start to come to a head next week, as the ex-president has only until next weekend to pay the $83.3 million verdict in E. Jean Carroll’s defamation lawsuit unless a court rules otherwise—and Carroll expressed “very serious concerns” Thursday about Trump’s ability to pay.

Key Facts

A jury ordered Trump to pay $83.3 million to Carroll for defamation—based on his attacks against the writer after she accused him of sexual assault—and the formal court judgment was entered on Feb. 8, meaning Trump’s payment is due by 30 days later on March 9.

Advertisement

Trump intends to appeal the judgment, but will still have to either pay the money into a court-controlled account or post an appeals bond guaranteeing his ability to pay.

The ex-president has asked the court to pause the judgment against him while he files post-trial motions in the case, or else allow Trump to post a “substantially reduced bond”—and while the court quickly rejected his request to immediately pause the judgment while it considers the motion, it still has to issue a lasting ruling.

Carroll’s attorneys argued in a court filing Thursday that Trump is asking the court to “simply trust that he’s very rich” and therefore doesn’t need to post a bond guaranteeing he’ll pay the money, while they have “very serious concerns about Trump’s cash position” and the “feasibility” of him paying what he owes.

Advertisement

Trump has separately been ordered to pay $454 million—and counting—in the civil fraud case against him and his company, and Carroll’s attorneys pointed to that judgment, the criminal cases against Trump and the ex-president’s lack of transparency around his finances as suggesting there “is absolutely no reason to believe that Trump has so much readily collectible cash on hand.”

The court has given Trump until 5 p.m. Saturday to respond to Carroll’s filing, and a ruling on whether Trump has to pay the judgment immediately could come soon after, as Trump has asked the court to rule by March 4.

Advertisement

Crucial Quote

Trump’s filing asking to pause the monetary judgment “simply asks the Court to ‘trust me’ and offers, in a case with an $83.3 million judgment against him, the court filing equivalent of a paper napkin; signed by the least trustworthy of borrowers,” Carroll’s attorneys wrote.

Chief Critic

Trump’s attorneys argued “there is no cognizable risk” of Trump not paying the judgment against him, noting Carroll has previously “concede[d] that President Trump’s resources suffice to satisfy the judgment.” “Having argued to the jury that President Trump has great financial resources, Plaintiff is in no position to contradict herself now and contend that she requires the protection of a bond during the brief period while post-trial motions are pending,” Trump’s lawyers claimed.

Forbes Valuation

Forbes estimates Trump’s net worth at $2.6 billion as of September. That includes just over $400 million in cash and liquid assets—enough to cover Carroll’s judgment alone, but not his total legal fines when combined with his judgment in the fraud case.

How Will Trump Pay?

It remains to be seen how Trump will cover the legal fines he owes—which total some $540 million and counting, between his fraud fine, the $83.3 million and a separate $5 million judgment from Carroll’s first trial against Trump, which has already been deposited into a court-controlled account. While Trump doesn’t have enough cash on hand to cover the costs, he does have several options, including borrowing against his assets, seeking help from wealthy friends or borrowing from financial institutions, which is now easier after a New York appeals court paused a penalty in his fraud judgment that barred Trump from seeking loans from New York-registered institutions. He could also put up some of his real estate assets for sale, his attorneys suggested in a filing in the fraud case. While the Carroll payment is coming due in a matter of days, the ex-president has a bit more time to put up the fraud ruling cash, as the New York Attorney General’s office, which brought the case, isn’t expected to start enforcing the judgment unless he hasn’t paid by March 25. Trump has similarly asked an appeals court to pause the judgment against him in that case—or post a $100 million bond—and while the court rejected his request on Wednesday to pause the monetary judgment while it considers the motion, it still has to issue a more lasting ruling.

Advertisement

Key Background

Carroll sued Trump in 2019 after she publicly accused him of sexual assault, alleging the then-president raped her in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room in the 1990s. Trump attacked Carroll in response, denying her account and claiming she isn’t “my type,” leading the writer to sue him for defamation. Trump’s reaction to her allegations caused Carroll “emotional pain and suffering at the hands of the man who raped her, as well as injury to her reputation, honor and dignity,” she alleged in the lawsuit. The case got stalled in court for years as Trump tried to dismiss the charges, and Carroll brought a second lawsuit against the ex-president alleging defamation and sexual assault under New York’s Adult Survivors Act. That case ended up going to trial first, resulting in Trump being found liable for defamation and sexual assault, but not rape. Because Trump had already been found liable in the first trial—based on substantially similar comments to the 2019 lawsuit—the second Carroll trial was only to determine how much Trump had to pay in damages. The jury ruled in January that Trump had to pay $18.3 million in compensatory damages and $65 million in punitive damages, which are meant to dissuade Trump from further defaming Carroll.

Further Reading

MORE FROM FORBESTrump Must Pay E. Jean Carroll $83 Million For Defamation, Jury Rules

MORE FROM FORBESHere Are Trump’s Most Valuable Properties
MORE FROM FORBESHere’s Why Trump Won’t Have To Sell Any Buildings To Come Up With $540 Million
MORE FROM FORBESHere’s Who Could Loan Trump $540 Million

News

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

Published

on

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

The Supreme Court

Win McNamee/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Win McNamee/Getty Images

The Supreme Court on Monday intervened in New York’s redistricting process, blocking a lower court decision that would likely have flipped a Republican congressional district into a Democratic district.    
  
At issue is the midterm redrawing of New York’s 11th congressional district, including Staten Island and a small part of Brooklyn. The district is currently held by a Republican, but on Jan. 21, a state Supreme Court judge ruled that the current district dilutes the power of Black and Latino voters in violation of the state constitution.  
  
GOP Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, who represents the district, and the Republican co-chair of the state Board of Elections promptly appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the justices to block the redrawing as an unconstitutional “racial gerrymander.” New York’s congressional election cycle was set to officially begin Feb. 24, the opening day for candidates to seek placement on the ballot.  
  
As in this year’s prior mid-decade redistricting fights — in Texas and California — the Trump administration backed the Republicans.   
 
Voters and the State of New York contended it’s too soon for the Supreme Court to wade into this dispute. New York’s highest state court has not issued a final judgment, so the voters asserted that if the Supreme Court grants relief now “future stay applicants will see little purpose in waiting for state court rulings before coming to this Court” and “be rewarded for such gamesmanship.” The state argues this is an issue for “New York courts, not federal courts” to resolve, and there is sufficient time for the dispute to be resolved on the merits. 
  
The court majority explained the decision to intervene in 101 words, which the three dissenting liberal justices  summarized as “Rules for thee, but not for me.” 
 
The unsigned majority order does not explain the Court’s rationale. It says only how long the stay will last, until the case moves through the New York State appeals courts. If, however, the losing party petitions and the court agrees to hear the challenge, the stay extends until the final opinion is announced. 
 
Dissenting from the decision were Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Writing for the three, Sotomayor  said that  if nonfinal decisions of a state trial court can be brought to highest court, “then every decision from any court is now fair game.” More immediately, she noted, “By granting these applications, the Court thrusts itself into the middle of every election-law dispute around the country, even as many States redraw their congressional maps ahead of the 2026 election.” 

Monday’s Supreme Court action deviates from the court’s hands-off pattern in these mid-term redistricting fights this year. In two previous cases — from Texas and California — the court refused to intervene, allowing newly drawn maps to stay in effect.  
  
Requests for Supreme Court intervention on redistricting issues has been a recurring theme this term, a trend that is likely to grow.  Earlier last month  the high court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map.  California’s redistricting came in response to a GOP-friendly redistricting plan in Texas that the Supreme Court also permitted to move forward. These redistricting efforts are expected to offset one another.     
   
But the high court itself has yet to rule on a challenge to Louisiana’s voting map, which was drawn by the state legislature after the decennial census in order to create a second majority-Black district.  Since the drawing of that second majority-black district, the state has backed away from that map, hoping to return to a plan that provides for only one majority-minority district.    
     
The Supreme Court’s consideration of the Louisiana case has stretched across two terms. The justices failed to resolve the case last term and chose to order a second round of arguments this term adding a new question: Does the state’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority district violate the constitution’s Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments’ guarantee of the right to vote and the authority of Congress to enforce that mandate?    
Following the addition of the new question, the state of Louisiana flipped positions to oppose the map it had just drawn and defended in court. Whether the Supreme Court follows suit remains to be seen. But the tone of the October argument suggested that the court’s conservative supermajority is likely to continue undercutting the 1965 Voting Rights Act.   

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

Published

on

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

Note: Map shows the area with a shake intensity of 3 or greater, which U.S.G.S. defines as “weak,” though the earthquake may be felt outside the areas shown.  All times on the map are Pacific time. The New York Times

A minor earthquake with a preliminary magnitude of 3.5 struck in Central California on Monday, according to the United States Geological Survey.

The temblor happened at 7:17 a.m. Pacific time about 6 miles northwest of Pinnacles, Calif., data from the agency shows.

As seismologists review available data, they may revise the earthquake’s reported magnitude. Additional information collected about the earthquake may also prompt U.S.G.S. scientists to update the shake-severity map.

Source: United States Geological Survey | Notes: Shaking categories are based on the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale. When aftershock data is available, the corresponding maps and charts include earthquakes within 100 miles and seven days of the initial quake. All times above are Pacific time. Shake data is as of Monday, March 2 at 10:20 a.m. Eastern. Aftershocks data is as of Monday, March 2 at 11:18 a.m. Eastern.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

US says Kuwait accidentally shot down 3 American jets

Published

on

US says Kuwait accidentally shot down 3 American jets

The U.S. and Israel have been conducting strikes against targets in Iran since Saturday morning, with the aim of toppling Tehran’s clerical regime. Iran has fired back, with retaliatory assaults featuring missiles and drones targeting several Gulf countries and American bases in the Middle East.

“All six aircrew ejected safely, have been safely recovered, and are in stable condition. Kuwait has acknowledged this incident, and we are grateful for the efforts of the Kuwaiti defense forces and their support in this ongoing operation,” Central Command said.

“The cause of the incident is under investigation. Additional information will be released as it becomes available,” it added.

In a separate statement later Monday, Central Command said that American forces had been killed during combat since the strikes began.

“As of 7:30 am ET, March 2, four U.S. service members have been killed in action. The fourth service member, who was seriously wounded during Iran’s initial attacks, eventually succumbed to their injuries,” it said.

Advertisement

Major combat operations continue and our response effort is ongoing. The identities of the fallen are being withheld until 24 hours after next of kin notification,” Central Command added.

This story has been updated.

Continue Reading

Trending