Honestly, it’s hard to keep up with the headlines sometimes. One day it’s a rally, the next it’s a courtroom, and tucked inside all that noise is a massive, complicated history of allegations. We’re talking about dozens of women. Specifically, at least 27 women have come forward over the last few decades to accuse Donald Trump of everything from inappropriate touching to outright rape. It's a lot. And while the term "fake news" gets thrown around like confetti, the legal system has actually started to weigh in with some very real, very expensive consequences.
If you’ve been following the news in 2025 and early 2026, you know the E. Jean Carroll case is basically the epicenter of this conversation. It’s not just a "he said, she said" story anymore. We have jury verdicts. We have appeals court rulings. And we have nearly $90 million in damages hanging in the balance. But how did we get here? And why did a jury find him liable for sexual abuse but not "rape" in the technical sense? It’s kinda confusing if you aren’t a lawyer, so let’s break down what actually happened in that dressing room and beyond.
The E. Jean Carroll Verdicts: Breaking Down the $88 Million
You've probably seen the numbers: $5 million, then $83.3 million. That’s a staggering amount of money for anyone, even a billionaire. The core of the legal battle stems from an incident in the mid-1990s at Bergdorf Goodman, a high-end department store in Manhattan. Carroll, a long-time advice columnist, alleged that she ran into Trump, they joked around, and then things turned dark in a dressing room.
In May 2023, a jury finally heard the evidence. They looked at a 1987 photo of the two together—debunking Trump’s claim he’d never met her—and heard from "outcry witnesses" who Carroll spoke to immediately after the assault. The result? The jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation.
Now, here’s where people get tripped up. The jury did not find him liable for "rape" under the very specific, narrow definition in New York criminal law at the time. In New York, back then, rape required proof of nonconsensual penetration by a penis. The jury found that Trump had forcibly penetrated Carroll with his fingers. While the "rape" box wasn't checked on the verdict sheet, Judge Lewis Kaplan later clarified that in common parlance—and for all intents and purposes—what the jury found Trump did was indeed rape.
- Carroll II (May 2023): $5 million awarded for sexual abuse and a 2022 Truth Social post.
- Carroll I (January 2024): $83.3 million awarded for defamatory comments Trump made while he was President in 2019.
Why was the second one so much higher? Basically, the jury wanted to make it stop. They felt Trump’s repeated attacks on Carroll’s character from the White House podium and beyond were so "reprehensible" that only a massive punitive fine would serve as a deterrent. Fast forward to late 2025, and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that $83.3 million judgment, calling his behavior "extraordinary and egregious."
👉 See also: What Really Happened With the Women's Orchestra of Auschwitz
Beyond Carroll: The Long List of Accusers
Carroll is the only one who has won a major civil trial, but she's definitely not the only one with a story. You might remember the Access Hollywood tape that leaked in 2016. That was the "grab 'em by the pussy" moment. Trump called it "locker room talk," but for many women, it sounded like a confession.
Shortly after that tape dropped, the floodgates opened. Jessica Leeds told The New York Times about a flight in the 1980s where Trump allegedly "was like an octopus," grabbing her breasts and trying to put his hand up her skirt. Then there was Natasha Stoynoff, a reporter for People magazine. She says she went to Mar-a-Lago in 2005 to interview Donald and Melania for their anniversary. According to her, Trump pinned her against a wall and forced his tongue down her throat the second Melania left the room.
It’s not just "random" women, either. It includes former Miss USA contestants and even his first wife, Ivana Trump. During their 1990 divorce deposition, Ivana described a "violent assault" in 1989 where she felt "violated." She later softened the language, saying she didn't want it interpreted in a "literal or criminal sense," but the initial testimony remains a permanent part of the public record.
More recently, in late 2024, former model Stacey Williams alleged that Trump groped her at Trump Tower in 1993 while Jeffrey Epstein looked on. The Trump campaign, as they always do, called it "unequivocally false" and a political hit job. But at what point does the sheer volume of similar stories—all involving the same patterns of behavior—become impossible to ignore?
Why the "Statute of Limitations" Didn't Save Him
You might wonder how someone can sue for something that happened in the 90s. Usually, you can’t. But New York passed the Adult Survivors Act (ASA). This was a special one-year window that allowed survivors of sexual assault to file civil lawsuits even if the statute of limitations had long since expired.
✨ Don't miss: How Much Did Trump Add to the National Debt Explained (Simply)
E. Jean Carroll jumped through that window.
Without the ASA, she never would have been able to hold him accountable in court for the 1996 incident. This law was a game-changer. It allowed a jury to actually look at the evidence rather than dismissing the case on a technicality. It’s also why we’re seeing so much legal movement now, decades after the alleged events took place.
The Strategy of Denial: Is it Backfiring?
Trump’s strategy has always been: deny, attack, and delay. He doesn't just say "it didn't happen." He says the women are "not his type," that they're "liars," or that they're part of a "deep state" conspiracy.
The problem with this strategy is that in a defamation case, the denial is the crime. Every time he calls Carroll a liar after a jury has already ruled she was telling the truth, he potentially opens himself up to a new lawsuit.
In late 2025, his legal team tried to argue that as President, he had "absolute immunity" from these civil suits. The courts didn't buy it. They ruled that immunity doesn't cover everything you say, especially when it involves personal attacks that have nothing to do with official duties. By the end of 2025, his options were running out. He even settled a defamation case with ABC News for about $15 million after an anchor said he was found liable for "rape" (which, again, was technically "sexual abuse" in the court's eyes).
🔗 Read more: The Galveston Hurricane 1900 Orphanage Story Is More Tragic Than You Realized
What Most People Get Wrong About the Cases
There is a huge misconception that since he wasn't "charged" with a crime, nothing happened. That’s not how the law works.
- Civil vs. Criminal: In a criminal case, the burden of proof is "beyond a reasonable doubt." In a civil case, like Carroll’s, it’s a "preponderance of the evidence." Basically, is it more likely than not that he did it? The jury said yes.
- The "Rape" Label: As mentioned, the judge himself stated that the jury's finding of sexual abuse was rape in common terms. People using the "not liable for rape" line are often clinging to a legal technicality while ignoring the fact that he was found to have forcibly penetrated a woman against her will.
- Political Motivation: While many accusers are critics of Trump, the evidence presented in court—including the testimony of other survivors like Jessica Leeds—was enough to convince a jury of citizens, not politicians.
What’s Next: Actionable Insights for Following the News
If you're trying to keep track of this saga as we move through 2026, here is how you can stay informed without getting lost in the spin:
- Watch the Supreme Court: Trump has requested the U.S. Supreme Court to review the Carroll verdicts. If they decline to hear it, he’s officially out of options and that $88 million (plus interest) will be due.
- Check the Bonds: Trump had to post massive bonds to appeal these cases. Keep an eye on the status of those funds; they represent the "real" money that Carroll is waiting to collect.
- Look for New Filings: With the precedent set by Carroll, other women might feel emboldened to use similar "survivor" laws if they are enacted in other states.
- Distinguish "Opinion" from "Fact": When you see a headline, check if it’s referring to a court ruling or a campaign statement. Court rulings are backed by evidence and jury deliberation; campaign statements are backed by... well, the campaign.
The saga of Donald Trump and the sexual assault allegations isn't just a footnote in history; it’s a living legal reality that has redefined how we look at power, consent, and the law. Whether you're a supporter or a critic, the facts of the E. Jean Carroll case are now a matter of public record, upheld by multiple levels of the American judiciary.
Next Steps:
To verify the current status of the appeals, you can search for the "Carroll v. Trump Second Circuit" docket. Additionally, reviewing the full text of the Adult Survivors Act can provide more context on why these "old" cases are finally making it to court. Stay tuned to legal analysts who specialize in New York civil law for the most accurate breakdowns of any future Supreme Court filings.