The Left’s lawfare campaign against President Donald Trump shows no sign of slowing. On Monday, a federal appeals court upheld an $83.3 million civil judgment in favor of columnist E. Jean Carroll—a self-described feminist who accused Trump of sexual assault nearly three decades after the alleged incident, without a shred of hard evidence to back it up.
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Trump’s appeal, declaring that “the jury’s damages awards are fair and reasonable.” Trump’s legal team had argued the case should be revisited in light of a Supreme Court ruling expanding presidential immunity and requested a new trial. The court flatly dismissed those arguments.
The massive payout stems not from the alleged encounter itself, but from Trump’s blunt social media commentary calling out Carroll’s claims as false. A Manhattan jury had previously awarded Carroll $83.3 million after she said Trump’s words damaged her reputation—on top of an earlier $5 million verdict tied to the same story.
To this day, Trump has firmly denied the accusation, pointing out that Carroll’s claims surfaced only when she was promoting a book. He dismissed the notion outright, even remarking she was “not my type.” Yet none of that mattered to a court determined to hand down a punishment that sends a political message as much as a legal one.
This latest ruling highlights a troubling reality: for high-profile conservatives, especially Donald Trump, the justice system is increasingly being weaponized by ideological opponents. Courts that should be neutral arbiters are too often willing to entertain shaky cases that advance political goals, while ordinary Americans foot the bill for endless litigation.
The outcome here is less about justice and more about intimidation—showing what happens when you challenge the ruling elite and refuse to bow to their narratives. Trump’s fight is far from over, but his case serves as a stark reminder of what unchecked activist courts can mean for due process and free speech in America.
