Honestly, the headlines made it sound like a total knockout. You probably saw them: Donald Trump wins lawsuit against ABC News. It’s the kind of story that sets social media on fire, depending on which side of the fence you're sitting on. But if you dig into the actual court filings and the messy reality of defamation law, the situation is way more nuanced than a simple win-loss record.
Basically, this whole thing started because of a few specific words spoken on a Sunday morning. We’re talking about George Stephanopoulos and a high-tension interview with Representative Nancy Mace. In that moment, the anchor said Trump had been found liable for "rape."
That one word? It ended up costing ABC a cool $15 million.
Why the ABC Lawsuit Even Started
Back in March 2024, things got heated on ABC’s This Week. Stephanopoulos was grilling Nancy Mace about her support for Trump, specifically pointing to the E. Jean Carroll civil cases. He stated—repeatedly—that a jury had found Trump liable for rape.
Here’s the thing: legally speaking, that wasn't quite right.
In the first Carroll trial, the jury actually found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation, but they didn't technically find him liable for "rape" as defined by New York's very specific, somewhat archaic penal code. Under that specific law, rape required a very narrow set of circumstances. Because the jury couldn't confirm those exact technical details, they checked the "sexual abuse" box instead.
💡 You might also like: Wisconsin Judicial Elections 2025: Why This Race Broke Every Record
Trump’s legal team pounced. They argued that by using the "R-word," Stephanopoulos wasn't just being casual—he was being defamatory. They filed suit in Florida, claiming the anchor acted with "actual malice."
The $15 Million Payday (With a Twist)
By December 2024, just as the depositions were about to get really uncomfortable, ABC threw in the towel. They settled.
But it wasn't a "check-in-the-mail to Mar-a-Lago" kind of win.
Instead of the money going into Trump’s personal bank account, the $15 million settlement was structured as a "charitable contribution." The funds are earmarked for Trump’s future presidential library and museum.
- $15 Million: To the presidential library fund.
- $1 Million: To cover Trump’s legal fees (paid to Alejandro Brito’s firm).
- The Editor's Note: ABC had to post a public "regret" note on their website.
It’s a massive amount of money for a network to cough up over a phrasing error, especially since Judge Lewis Kaplan (who oversaw the Carroll cases) had previously said the "rape" claim was "substantially true" in a non-technical sense. But ABC clearly didn't want to risk a Florida jury or the discovery process.
📖 Related: Casey Ramirez: The Small Town Benefactor Who Smuggled 400 Pounds of Cocaine
The "Substantially True" Argument That Failed
You might wonder why ABC didn't just fight it. They tried. Their initial defense was basically: "Look, the judge himself said it was basically rape, so George wasn't lying."
Judge Kaplan had actually written in a 2023 ruling that the jury's finding of sexual abuse meant Trump had "raped" Carroll in the way most people commonly understand the word. He noted that the New York definition was just exceptionally narrow.
However, in the world of defamation, "close enough" can be a dangerous game. The Florida judge in the ABC case wasn't as convinced that the distinction was minor. By settling, ABC avoided a trial that could have dragged on for years and potentially resulted in an even bigger judgment if a jury decided they were trying to smear the President-elect.
What This Means for the Media in 2026
This wasn't just about one interview. It was a shot across the bow. Since this settlement, we’ve seen a shift in how major networks handle "hot" legal terminology.
The fact that Trump wins lawsuit against ABC became a reality—even through a settlement—has made legal departments at places like CBS and CNN incredibly jumpy. In fact, Trump landed a similar $16 million settlement with Paramount (CBS) over the editing of a Kamala Harris interview shortly after.
👉 See also: Lake Nyos Cameroon 1986: What Really Happened During the Silent Killer’s Release
It’s kida changed the vibe of political reporting. You'll notice anchors are now much more careful to say "civilly liable for sexual abuse" rather than using broader terms. They don't want to be the next ones funding a wing of a presidential library.
Actionable Takeaways for Following the News
If you're trying to keep track of these legal battles without getting swept up in the hype, here’s how to read between the lines:
- Check the "E" in E-E-A-T: Don't just trust a headline that says "Win" or "Loss." Look for the specific legal outcome. A settlement isn't technically a "win" in court, but in the court of public opinion, it usually functions as one.
- Watch the "Technicalities": Law is all about definitions. The difference between "sexual abuse" and "rape" might seem like semantics to a layperson, but it's worth millions in a courtroom.
- Follow the Money: Always look at where the settlement money is going. If it’s going to a library or a non-profit, it’s often a sign of a compromise to save face for the network while giving the plaintiff a "victory" they can brag about.
The ABC settlement proved that even the biggest media giants have a breaking point when it comes to precision. Whether you think it was a fair win or a "nuisance settlement," it’s reshaped the legal landscape for 2026 and beyond.
To stay updated on the status of the $10 billion BBC lawsuit or the ongoing Carroll appeals, you should monitor the federal court dockets for the Southern District of Florida and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.