From 2h ago
Donald Trump has asked a federal court in New York to slash the $5m penalty awarded against him in the sexual assault and defamation civil case won by writer E Jean Carroll down to just $1m – or grant him a new trial.
The case went in Carroll’s favor last month when a jury decided that Trump had sexually abused and defamed her.
Trump’s legal team has argued to the court that the damages awarded against him are excessive and the court should either slash them or allow a new trial.
Reuters adds:
The lawyers noted in a written submission that a Manhattan federal court jury last month rejected a rape claim made by the writer, E. Jean Carroll, concluding instead that she had been sexually abused in spring 1996 in the store’s dressing room.
“Such abuse could have included groping of Plaintiff’s breasts through clothing, or similar conduct, which is a far cry from rape,” the lawyers wrote.
They said the $2 million granted by the jury on a sexual abuse claim was “grossly excessive” and another $2.7 million issued for compensatory defamation damages was “based upon pure speculation.”
The award should consist of no more than $400,000 for sex abuse, no more than $100,000 for defamation and $368,000 or less for the cost of a campaign to repair Carroll‘s reputation, the lawyers wrote.
If a judge does not grant the suggested reduction in the award, then he should permit a new trial on damages, they said.
Roberta Kaplan, Carroll’s attorney, said in an emailed statement that the arguments by Trump’s lawyers were frivolous.
She said the unanimous jury had concluded that Trump sexually assaulted Carroll and then defamed her “by lying about her with hatred, ill-will, or spite.”
“This time, Trump will not be able to escape the consequences of his actions,” Kaplan said.
Trump may still face a second defamation trial resulting from another lawsuit Carroll filed against him. That case has been delayed with appeals as the U.S. Justice Department sought to substitute the United States as the defendant in place of Trump. Government lawyers say Trump can’t be held liable for the comments he made as president.
Hello US politics blog readers, it’s been an eventful day in US political news. We’re closing this blog now and will start afresh on Friday. We have stand alone stories on some of the biggest news of the day, links in the bullet points below.
Here’s where things stand:
Donald Trump has asked a federal court in New York to slash the $5m penalty awarded against him in the sexual assault and defamation civil case won by writer E Jean Carroll down to just $1m – or grant him a new trial.
The White House has had to postpone a party due for this evening, where thousands of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer-plus (LGBTQ+) people were invited to a celebration and, essentially, a political defiance event. Reuters further reports that Biden said violence against LGBTQ+ people in the United States is on the rise and anti-LGBTQ rhetoric is an appeal to fear that is “unjustified” and “ugly.”
Hardline Republicans have effectively paralyzed the chamber because they’re unhappy at speaker Kevin McCarthy over the deal with Democrats that resolved the problem with the US debt ceiling. The spat appears to have widened to envelop No 2 House Republican Steve Scalise, who appears unhappy with the speaker.
The US supreme court ruled that Alabama discriminated against Black voters when it drew its seven congressional districts last year. The ruling in Allen v Milligan means that Alabama will have to draw its congressional map afresh to include a second majority-Black district.
Donald Trump has asked a federal court in New York to slash the $5m penalty awarded against him in the sexual assault and defamation civil case won by writer E Jean Carroll down to just $1m – or grant him a new trial.
The case went in Carroll’s favor last month when a jury decided that Trump had sexually abused and defamed her.
Trump’s legal team has argued to the court that the damages awarded against him are excessive and the court should either slash them or allow a new trial.
Reuters adds:
The lawyers noted in a written submission that a Manhattan federal court jury last month rejected a rape claim made by the writer, E. Jean Carroll, concluding instead that she had been sexually abused in spring 1996 in the store’s dressing room.
“Such abuse could have included groping of Plaintiff’s breasts through clothing, or similar conduct, which is a far cry from rape,” the lawyers wrote.
They said the $2 million granted by the jury on a sexual abuse claim was “grossly excessive” and another $2.7 million issued for compensatory defamation damages was “based upon pure speculation.”
The award should consist of no more than $400,000 for sex abuse, no more than $100,000 for defamation and $368,000 or less for the cost of a campaign to repair Carroll‘s reputation, the lawyers wrote.
If a judge does not grant the suggested reduction in the award, then he should permit a new trial on damages, they said.
Roberta Kaplan, Carroll’s attorney, said in an emailed statement that the arguments by Trump’s lawyers were frivolous.
She said the unanimous jury had concluded that Trump sexually assaulted Carroll and then defamed her “by lying about her with hatred, ill-will, or spite.”
“This time, Trump will not be able to escape the consequences of his actions,” Kaplan said.
Trump may still face a second defamation trial resulting from another lawsuit Carroll filed against him. That case has been delayed with appeals as the U.S. Justice Department sought to substitute the United States as the defendant in place of Trump. Government lawyers say Trump can’t be held liable for the comments he made as president.
Here’s New York civil rights campaigner and politician Al Sharpton on the supreme court decision.
This was an unexpected decision that hopefully means the Supreme Court’s era of disenfranchising voters is coming to an end.
Alabama’s gerrymandering policies were quintessential, modern-day Jim Crow tactics to suppress Black voters in the state. That you had two conservative-leaning judges rule against the state all but confirms that.
This is a major step forward in the fight to protect voting rights. Let’s not forget that we’re in this mess because the Supreme Court took a sledgehammer to the Voting Rights Act a decade ago when it ruled on Shelby v. Holder.
States essentially got the green light to recut lines, purge voter rolls, and take any other steps to keep Black and Brown Americans from showing up at the polls. Today’s ruling only goes to show why Congress has a moral imperative to pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Act this year.
We have been promised since we lost John Lewis three years ago, amid historic protests against racial injustice, and we will not wait until next year when lawmakers need our vote again. On August 26th, we will gather for the 60th Anniversary of the March on Washington to send a clear message that this legislation must pass now.”
US attorney general Merrick Garland has issued a response to the supreme court’s decision on Alabama and also a fresh call to the US Congress to pass some of the voting rights legislation that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris campaigned on in 2020 but is growing mildew on Capitol Hill.
Garland said:
Today’s decision rejects efforts to further erode fundamental voting rights protections, and preserves the principle that in the United States, all eligible voters must be able to exercise their constitutional right to vote free from discrimination based on their race.
The right to vote is the cornerstone of our democracy, the right from which all other rights ultimately flow.
Over the past two years, the Justice Department has rededicated its resources to enforcing federal voting rights protections. We will continue to use every authority we have left to defend voting rights. But that is not enough. We urge Congress to act to provide the Department with important authorities it needs to protect the voting rights of every American.”
Here’s Janai Nelson, president and director- counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund (LDF), on the Scotus decision.
There is praise to go around.
On Deuel Ross, racial justice attorney at the Legal Defense Fund:
More reaction now to the surprise decision by the US supreme court earlier to defend the Voting Rights Act in a case involving Alabama’s electoral map.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has released a statement thus, which includes some useful background:
The U.S. Supreme Court today ruled in Allen v. Milligan in favor of Black voters who challenged Alabama’s 2021-enacted congressional map for violating the Voting Rights Act of 1965 for diluting Black political power, affirming the district court’s order that Alabama redraw its congressional map.
By packing and cracking the historic Black Belt community, the map passed by the state legislature allowed Black voters an opportunity to elect candidates of their choice in only one of seven districts even though they make up 27 percent percent of the voting-age population. In its decision, the court also affirmed that under Section 2 of the VRA, race can be used in the redistricting process to provide equal opportunities to communities of color and ensure they are not packed and cracked in a way that impermissibly weakens their voting strength.
The case was brought in November 2021 on behalf of Evan Milligan, Khadidah Stone, Letetia Jackson, Shalela Dowdy, Greater Birmingham Ministries, and the Alabama State Conference of the NAACP who are represented by the Legal Defense Fund (LDF), American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Alabama, Hogan Lovells LLP, and Wiggins, Childs, Pantazis, Fisher & Goldfarb. It was argued before the court on Oct. 4, 2022.
“This decision is a crucial win against the continued onslaught of attacks on voting rights,” said LDF senior counsel Deuel Ross, who argued the case before the court in October. “Alabama attempted to rewrite federal law by saying race had no place in redistricting. But because of the state’s sordid and well-documented history of racial discrimination, race must be used to remedy that past and ensure communities of color are not boxed out of the electoral process. While the Voting Rights Act and other key protections against discriminatory voting laws have been weakened in recent years and states continue to pass provisions to disenfranchise Black voters, today’s decision is a recognition of Section 2’s purpose to prevent voting discrimination and the very basic right to a fair shot.”
Davin Rosborough, senior staff attorney with the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project, said, “The Supreme Court rejected the Orwellian idea that it’s inappropriate to consider race in determining whether racial discrimination led to the creation of illegal maps. This ruling is a huge victory for Black Alabamians.”
It’s been a busy morning in US politics and there will be plenty more developments on subjects ranging from Trump and E Jean Carroll to the supreme court’s surprise ruling on Alabama’s biased voting maps.
Here’s where things stand:
Donald Trump has asked for a new trial in the civil case brought by author E Jean Carroll, in which a Manhattan jury last month found the former US president liable for sexually abusing and defaming the writer and awarded her $5m in damages.
The White House has had to postpone a party due for this evening, where thousands of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer-plus (LGBTQ+) people were invited to a celebration and, essentially, a political defiance event.
Hardline Republicans have effectively paralyzed the chamber because they’re unhappy at speaker Kevin McCarthy over the deal with Democrats that resolved the problem with the US debt ceiling. The spat appears to have widened to envelop No 2 House Republican Steve Scalise, who appears unhappy with the speaker.
The US supreme court ruled that Alabama discriminated against Black voters when it drew its seven congressional districts last year. The ruling in Allen v Milligan means that Alabama will have to draw its congressional map afresh to include a second majority-Black district.
Another quick reminder that British prime minister Rishi Sunak and US president Joe Biden are about to hold a press conference at the White House.
It’s beginning any moment and our London colleagues are glued to it. There’s a live feed and all the developments as they happen, via the UK politics blog, here.
No sooner had a New York jury found for E Jean Carroll than Donald Trump verbally attacked her during a live town hall-style interview on CNN (the broadcast which was probably the penultimate nail in the coffin for departing CNN chair Chris Licht before the crushing Atlantic article).
Carroll promptly went back to court to to demand “very substantial” additional damages from Trump for the disparaging remarks, filing an amended lawsuit seeking an additional $10m in compensatory damages – and more in punitive damages.
During the town hall in New Hampshire the day after the 9 May verdict, Trump further and repeatedly demeaned Carroll and her experiences.
Trump said her account of a sexual assault, in the case which he is appealing, was “fake” and a “made-up story” and referred to it as “hanky-panky”. He repeated past claims that he’d never met Carroll and considered her a “whack job”.
The filing by Carroll the following week claimed Trump’s statements at the televised town hall “show the depth of his malice toward Carroll, since it is hard to imagine defamatory conduct that could possibly be more motivated by hatred, ill will or spite”.
Now Trump wants a new trial.
Last month a New York jury found that Donald Trump sexually abused the former advice columnist, E Jean Carroll, in one of New York City’s most upscale stores, in the changing room at Bergdorf Goodman on Fifth Avenue, 27 years ago.
The verdict on 9 May, for the first time, essentially legally branded a former US president as a sexual predator. It was the result of a civil not criminal case, and the only legal sanction Trump faced was financial.
At the time, my colleagues Chris McGreal and Martin Pengelly noted that: In explaining a finding of sexual abuse to the jury, the judge said it had two elements: that Trump subjected Carroll to sexual contact without consent by use of force, and that it was for the purpose of sexual gratification.
The jury deliberated for less than three hours. It did not find Trump raped Carroll, but did find him liable for sexual abuse.
It awarded about $5m in compensatory and punitive damages: about $2m on the sexual abuse count and close to $3m for defamation, for branding her a liar.
In an interview the following day, Carroll said she was “overwhelmed with joy for the women in this country”.
It would be staggering if Donald Trump succeeded in getting a new civil trial in the issues brought against him by E Jean Carroll, after she sued him for defamation and sexual abuse and won hands down after a brisk jury decision.
But the former US president is having a go.
Donald Trump has asked for a new trial in the civil case brought by author E Jean Carroll, in which a Manhattan jury last month found the former US president liable for sexually abusing and defaming the writer and awarded her $5m in damages, Reuters reports.
This according to a new court filing. More on this asap.
Smoke gets in your eyes. Sadly, the White House has had to postpone a party due for this evening at the White House, where thousands of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer-plus (LGBTQ+) people were invited to a celebration and, essentially, a political defiance event at the White House.
The smoky air drifting south from the Canadian wildfires that’s been causing havoc on the eastern seaboard and further inland has put paid to tonight’s party.
BUT in better news, it is currently rescheduled for Saturday.
NBC reports that the event was/is designed as:
A high-profile show of support at a time when the community feels under attack like never before and the White House has little recourse to beat back a flood of state-level legislation against them.
Biden is also announcing new initiatives to protect LGBTQ+ communities from attacks, help youth with mental health resources and homelessness and counter book bans, White House officials said.
The event is a:
Picnic featuring food, games, face painting and photos. Queen HD the DJ was handling the music; singer Betty Who was on tap to perform.
Karine Jean-Pierre, the first openly gay White House press secretary, said Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris and their spouses are strong supporters of the LGBTQ+ community and think that having a celebration is an important way to “lift up” their accomplishments and contributions.
She said LGBTQ+ people need to know that Biden “has their back” and “will continue to fight for them. And that’s the message that we want to make sure that gets out there.”
FYI Harris is in the Bahamas today on business and is expected back in DC tonight. Biden’s meeting Rishi Sunak at the White House and holding a presser soon.
You can follow all the latest developments on the Canadian wildfires and the smoke impact on the US in our dedicated live blog:
There’s some context on the relationship between House speaker Kevin McCarthy and his chamber GOP No. 2, Steve Scalise, the House majority leader, from the Punchbowl report, prior to the hardliners’ spat now rippling out on Capitol Hill.
The outlet points out that a captain having friction with his supposed wingman “is a tale as old as time in House leadership” and these two have known each other for decades.
Punchbowl reports:
The pair met as young College Republicans and their interactions have always been professional. But there’s no doubt some bad blood between the two men.
Scalise considered running against McCarthy for Republican leader in 2019, but ultimately decided against it — something we cataloged at length in a book we wrote. And again, McCarthy tapped [Louisiana congressman Garrett] Graves and [North Carolina congressman Patrick] McHenry for the most sensitive negotiations of the last few months, leaving Scalise aside.
Scalise said in the interview that McCarthy is still viable as speaker of the House. But the House majority leader noted repeatedly that there is “a lot of anger on a lot of sides of our conference.”
An old article from Politico notes that McCarthy and Scalise’s “parallel rise” dates to the late 1990s. McCarthy was national chairman of the Young Republicans and Scalise was an up and coming Louisiana politician and their friendship developed from that time.
British prime minister Rishi Sunak, from the Conservative Party, is in Washington DC, this week and is meeting right now with Joe Biden at the White House.
The premier and the US president are due to hold a press conference at 1.30pm US east coast time. Our colleagues in London are focusing on this and will be covering it as it happens via the UK politics blog, with a live stream of the event.
You can keep up with that blog here.
Selma native and Alabama congresswoman Terri Sewell just hopped on the phone for a live interview with CNN on air to express her relief and delight about the supreme court decision on voting rights and the relevant district maps in her state.
“This is so exciting, it’s really amazing … it’s an amazing victory for Alabama Black voters, for the Voting Rights Act, for democracy,” she said.
She tweeted about a “historic victory”.
Sewell said the ruling reflected the legacy of the long legacy of fighting for civil rights for Black voters in Alabama and elsewhere and she was “reeling” from the good surprise.
“And to have the supreme court give us this huge win, it’s historic,” she told CNN.
She noted this would have implications more widely and was a closely watched case by legislatures creating voting maps, especially in states such as North Carolina and Ohio. “Everyone is looking at this decision,” she said, adding “it will have a positive ripple effect.”
She noted that the late civil rights activist, champion and congressman John Lewis “must be smiling” and that those who challenged Alabama’s discriminatory voting rights did was Lewis always encouraged people do to: “we got into some good trouble.”
This is Sewell’s pinned tweet:
Source: US Politics - theguardian.com
