The Judge Says It Is “Absur” Trump Tried To Get The Rape Victim’s Lawsuit Thrown Out

After Donald Trump denied raping E. Jean Carroll in the mid-1990s, the writer filed a lawsuit against him, accusing him of defamation and violence. On Friday, a court in the United States rejected as “absurd” the former president’s attempt to have the lawsuit dismissed.

Trump’s argument that Carroll’s battery claim filed under New York’s Adult Survivors Act must be dismissed because the law denied him due process in violation of the state constitution was deemed to be without merit by U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan in Manhattan, who presided over the case. Kaplan said that Trump’s argument had no merit.

The judge said that Carroll, a former journalist for Elle magazine, was not required by state law to demonstrate that she experienced an economic loss as a result of Trump’s comments. This was contrary to what Trump had contended.

A lawyer representing Trump named Alina Habba stated that her client was “disappointed with the court’s ruling” and that they intended to file an appeal as soon as possible. Roberta Kaplan, an attorney for Carroll, stated that her client was “pleased though not surprised” by the outcome.

The Judge Says It Is "Absur" Trump Tried To Get The Rape Victim's Lawsuit Thrown Out
The Judge Says It Is “Absur” Trump Tried To Get The Rape Victim’s Lawsuit Thrown Out

The complaint is one of two in which Carroll accuses Trump of defamation when he denied raping her in a dressing room at a Bergdorf Goodman department shop in late 1995 or early 1996. The other case was filed by Carroll.

Trump initially denied the accusation in June 2019, telling a reporter at the White House that he did not know Carroll, that “she’s not my type,” and that Carroll invented the claim in order to sell her new biography. Carroll then filed a lawsuit against Trump after he denied the accusation.

The second lawsuit was initiated as a result of a post that Donald Trump made on social media in October 2022. In the post, Trump referred to the rape allegation as a “hoax,” “lie,” “con job,” and “total scam,” and he also stated that “this can only happen to ‘Trump’!”

This case contained a claim for battery under the Adult Survivors Act, which, beginning November 24 of the previous year, allowed adults a one-year window during which they could sue their alleged attackers even if the statutes of limitations had already passed.

‘DEMONSTRABLY INCORRECT’

Trump’s argument that the law was unconstitutional because lawmakers did not adequately explain why it was necessary was deemed “demonstrably erroneous” by Judge Kaplan. Trump claimed that the bill was unconstitutional because lawmakers did not adequately explain why it was necessary.

The court explained that lawmakers enacted the law to assist victims of sexual assault who may have repressed memories of their attacks or, like Carroll, were discouraged from bringing legal action out of fear of the consequences.

“To suggest that the ASA violates the state due process clause because the legislature supposedly did not describe that injustice to the defendant’s entire satisfaction in a particular paragraph of a particular type of legislative document – itself a dubious premise – is absurd,” Judge Kaplan wrote in his opinion.

“[T]o suggest that the ASA violates the state due process clause because the legislature supposedly did not describe that injustice to the defendant’s entire satisfaction in a particular paragraph of a particular

In 2024, Trump intends to run for reelection to the White House. Both he and Carroll are currently awaiting a ruling from an appeals court in Washington, District of Columbia, about whether or not, according to the statutes of the district, Trump should be exempt from Carroll’s initial complaint regarding his comments made in June of 2019.

If the court found that Trump was speaking in his capacity as president, the case would most likely be thrown out. However, if Trump was speaking in his personal capacity, as Carroll contended, the lawsuit would be allowed to proceed. Any decision that was made would have no bearing on the second defamation action filed by Carroll. The first trial, which will take place on April 10, has been planned.

I hope you like our article. If this is the case, we would appreciate it if you would share your insightful ideas in the comments below. You may get even more of these updates by adding Journalistpr.com. to your collection of bookmarks.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *