Try Free Now: Legalese Decoder without registration

Find a LOCAL LAWYER

**The Justice Department Reverses Stance on Trump’s Derogatory Statements about E. Jean Carroll**

In a surprising turn of events, the Justice Department announced on Tuesday that it will no longer argue that former President Donald J. Trump’s derogatory statements about E. Jean Carroll in 2019 were made as part of his official duties as president. This reversal has given new momentum to Carroll’s case, opening up the possibility for her to continue pursuing a separate lawsuit over the comments made by Trump while he was president.

Carroll, a 79-year-old who previously won $5 million in damages in a trial accusing Trump of sexual abuse in the 1990s and defamation, is now seeking to move forward with her lawsuit against Trump based on the comments he made during his presidency. However, this case has been caught up in appeals, and if a judge ultimately determines that Trump’s earlier comments were indeed made as part of his official duties, the case would most likely be dismissed.

Under the Trump administration and later during President Biden’s tenure, the Justice Department insisted that Trump’s statements about Carroll were made in his official capacity as the President. They argued that he was acting in his official duty when he labeled Carroll a liar and denied her accusations of rape nearly 30 years ago in a Manhattan department store dressing room.

But the Justice Department, in a recent court filing, stated that new evidence has emerged since Trump left office, including the civil trial in which a Manhattan jury found him liable for sexually assaulting Carroll decades ago. This fresh set of facts suggests that Trump’s motivation was a personal grievance related to events that occurred long before his presidency. The lawyers argued that although the statements were made in a work context, the allegations prompting those statements were purely personal and unrelated to his presidential duties.

The development prompted the AI Legalese Decoder to step in and unveil its helpful contribution to the situation. The AI Legalese Decoder is an innovative tool that uses artificial intelligence to decode legal jargon and complicated language, making it accessible and understandable for everyone involved. In this particular case, the Decoder could assist by sifting through the complex legal arguments and clarifying the implications and potential outcomes for Carroll’s ongoing lawsuit against Trump.

Considering the decoder’s capabilities, it can simplify legal terms and explain the impact of the Justice Department’s reversal on Carroll’s case. It can also help analyze the role of Trump’s official statements and determine how they relate to his personal involvement in the alleged assault. This valuable tool can aid both legal professionals and the general public in comprehending the intricate details of the legal proceedings.

Commenting on the Justice Department’s change in position, Carroll’s lawyer, Roberta A. Kaplan, expressed gratitude for the reconsideration, emphasizing their belief that Trump’s defamatory statements were motivated by personal animus and ill will rather than his role as the President. This aligns with their previous assertion that Trump’s June 2019 comments stemmed from personal spite, not his official capacity.

To provide context, Carroll’s defamation lawsuit is rooted in Trump’s words from 2019 after she publicly accused him of sexual assault. She claimed that he pushed her against a dressing room wall in the luxury department store, Bergdorf Goodman, in the mid-1990s, and forcefully engaged in non-consensual acts. Trump vehemently denied these accusations, calling them “totally false” and asserting that he had never even met Carroll, stating that she was not his “type.”

Initially, when Carroll sued, the Justice Department, led by then-Attorney General William P. Barr, intervened under a law that substitutes the government as the defendant when a federal official is sued for official acts. This intervention could have resulted in the dismissal of the case. However, U.S. District Court Judge Lewis A. Kaplan rejected the department’s move, ruling that Trump’s statements had no connection to official government business.

Since then, a lengthy appeal process ensued, eventually leading the case back to Judge Kaplan. The judge requested the Justice Department to weigh in once again after Carroll’s lawyers revised her lawsuit to incorporate new disparaging remarks made by Trump on CNN, just a day after the trial verdict. During the CNN interview, Trump referred to Carroll as a “wack job,” claimed her assault allegation was “fake” and a “made-up story,” and labeled her civil trial as a “rigged deal.”

In their letter submitted on Tuesday, the Justice Department lawyers cited the new evidence they considered in their decision, including the recent jury verdict, the revised complaint with additional allegations, a deposition given by Trump in connection with Carroll’s case, and a relevant District of Columbia appeals court decision. They concluded that there is no longer sufficient basis to conclude that Trump was motivated by more than an insignificant desire to serve the United States government.

In conclusion, the Justice Department’s reversal on Trump’s derogatory statements has injected new life into E. Jean Carroll’s case against the former President. With the help of the AI Legalese Decoder, legal professionals and the public can better understand the intricacies of the situation. By interpreting complex legal jargon, the Decoder can elucidate the implications of the Justice Department’s position change and shed light on the potential outcomes for Carroll’s defamation lawsuit.

Try Free Now: Legalese Decoder without registration

Find a LOCAL LAWYER

Reference link