Breakthrough Web Design - 515-897-1144 - Web sites for businesses
News & Entertainment for Mason City, Clear Lake & the Entire North Iowa Region

Founded October 1, 2010


Judge rules against Donald Trump in rape case


This news story was published on October 27, 2020.
Advertise on NIT Subscribe to NIT

President Donald Trump

NEW YORK – A Judge today has ruled against Donald Trump in a case in which a woman claims Trump raped her and then defamed her and the Department of Justice sought to replace Trump as the defendant in the lawsuit.

U.S. District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan of the Southern District of New York ruled today that the Justice Department cannot be allowed to replace Donald Trump as defendant in the defamation lawsuit brought by E Jean Carroll, who claims Donald Trump raped her. The facts of the case as stated in the opinion:

The plaintiff in this case, E. Jean Carroll, published a book excerpt in 2019 in which she wrote that, in the 1990s, businessman Donald J. Trump, as he then was, raped her in a dressing room of a New York City department store. Almost immediately after publication of Ms. Carroll’s excerpt, Mr. Trump – who by then was president – told the press that Ms. Carroll had made up the rape story. In substance, he called Ms. Carroll a liar and stated that he never met her. So Ms. Carroll sued him in New York State court. She claims that his statements accusing her of lying about the alleged rape were false, that they injured her reputation, and that she is entitled to damages from him. The legal terms are that Ms. Carroll asserts that President Trump’s statements were defamatory – libelous and slanderous.

The question whether Mr. Trump in fact raped Ms. Carroll appears to be at the heart of her lawsuit. That is so because the truth or falsity of a defendant’s alleged defamatory statements can be dispositive of any defamation case. Although the Court eventually may need to resolve this issue, this opinion concerns a threshold question. To make the significance of that question clear, we must digress into some technical detail.

Ms. Carroll sued the president in his individual (or personal) capacity, as distinguished from suing him as the president (i.e., in his official capacity). In other words, she claims that the president personally harmed her and that he, not the U.S. government, should pay any damages to which she may be entitled.

For nearly a year, this lawsuit proceeded in state court as an ordinary defamation case between Ms. Carroll and President Trump. The president defended the case as a private individual. He was represented by his personal lawyers, not by the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) or other government lawyers. And although he claimed that he could not be sued because he currently is president, the state court rejected that argument and denied a stay of further proceedings, which would have included pretrial discovery.

It was at that point that the U.S. government inserted itself into the case. It “removed” the case from the state court to this one – that is, it filed a paper certifying that a designee of the Attorney General had determined that the president’s statements to the press were part of his job as president and that this case therefore could be moved into federal court. For reasons that will appear, that certificate – whether it is right or wrong – conclusively authorized the removal of the case, and no one claims otherwise. But the DOJ did something else too, and that is what now is before the Court.

The government moves to substitute the United States for President Trump as the defendant. It does so in essence on the theory that this is not truly a lawsuit against President Trump as a private individual. Instead, the government argues, this is really a lawsuit against the United States because Ms. Carroll has sued an “employee” of the United States of America for actions within the scope of his employment. The government thus asserts that this case is virtually identical in principle to a lawsuit against a Postal Service driver for causing a car accident while delivering the mail. But the word “virtually” in the last sentence is necessary because there is an important difference between this case and the case of the hypothetical mail driver. Here is the catch.

The United States of America is a sovereign nation. It therefore shares with other nations what is called sovereign immunity. This means that it cannot be sued for money damages except to the extent that it explicitly has agreed to being sued.

Within certain limits, the United States has so agreed in a statute called the Federal Tort Claims Act (the “FTCA”). The FTCA authorizes damages claims for negligence and certain other civil wrongs committed by government employees within the scope of their employment. The postal driver hypothetical is a classic example of a case that generally would be covered by the statute. But the FTCA specifically excepts libel and slander cases from the United States’s consent to be sued. Thus, if this really is a suit against the United States, it is one to which the United States seemingly has not waived its sovereign immunity. So if President Trump is an “employee of the Government” within the meaning of the FTCA, and if his statements about Ms. Carroll were within “the scope of his employment,” it could well be argued that this case must be dismissed because the United States has sovereign immunity.3 In that event, Ms. Carroll would be left with no remedy, even if the president’s statements were false and defamatory.

This is the nutshell version of this case. But for the present purpose of deciding the government’s motion to substitute, the dispositive questions are two:

• Is the president an “employee of the Government” within the meaning of the FTCA?

• Even if the president is an “employee of the Government” as the FTCA defines that term, were his statements concerning Ms. Carroll within the scope of his “employment” under the law of the relevant jurisdiction?

The answer to both questions is “no.” While the president possesses all of the executive power of the United States, he is not an “employee” within the meaning of the FTCA. The FTCA’s definition of that term does not include presidents. And even if the president were an employee under that statute, his statements concerning Ms. Carroll were not within the scope of his employment under the law of the relevant jurisdiction, which for reasons explained below is Washington, D.C.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

 characters available

49 Responses to Judge rules against Donald Trump in rape case

  1. Avatar

    anonymous Reply Report comment

    November 3, 2020 at 6:54 pm

    yes, lets vote for a rapist and a pussy grabber by his own admission. trump is a big fat liar and we all know it. vote for what is right. not permanent tax cuts for the rich. but for benefits that help all!

  2. Avatar

    Anonymous Reply Report comment

    November 2, 2020 at 5:23 am

    Y ou are on the WRONG SIDE OF HISTORY if you WASTE UR vote. on biden

  3. Avatar

    Anonymous Reply Report comment

    November 1, 2020 at 8:05 pm

    You to can have bafahehdhbchsre. Look see my Eagles coat ????!!!
    Biden is an embarrassment

  4. Avatar

    Anonymous Reply Report comment

    November 1, 2020 at 6:27 pm

    TRUMP WILL WIN MINNESOTA !!!

  5. Avatar

    Anonymous Reply Report comment

    November 1, 2020 at 2:30 pm

    TRUMP WILL WIN NEW HAMPSHIRE AS WELL !!

  6. Avatar

    anonymous Reply Report comment

    October 31, 2020 at 11:16 pm

    look up the fact checks. trump is lying in your face!

    • Avatar

      Anonymous Reply Report comment

      November 1, 2020 at 1:55 pm

      and Biden’s not? they are running for office

      • Avatar

        Anonymous Reply Report comment

        November 1, 2020 at 6:39 pm

        22,000 lies and counting you support this corrupt asshole trump you are 1 SICK puppy

  7. Avatar

    Anonymous Reply Report comment

    October 31, 2020 at 5:19 pm

    Trump Train car rally Last weekend wrapped around clear lake. Biden’s car parade was ONE Prius driving around in circles. Hahaha

  8. Avatar

    Anonymous Reply Report comment

    October 31, 2020 at 4:43 pm

    I’m 100% sure he didn’t know where he was when he voted

  9. Avatar

    Anonymous Reply Report comment

    October 31, 2020 at 4:41 pm

    I’m 50% sure Biden voted for himself

  10. Avatar

    mint Reply Report comment

    October 31, 2020 at 10:37 am

    Watch the “Simpson’s”, disclosure by the Hierarchy. Ploy to keep the masses divided, distracted & dumbed down, it works, Tavistock Institute they have studied the brain for over 100 years.

  11. Avatar

    Anonymous Reply Report comment

    October 30, 2020 at 11:37 am

    It reminds of sheep being led to slaughter….. democrats supporting Biden
    JUST PLAIN F******* stupid

  12. Avatar

    Anonymous Reply Report comment

    October 30, 2020 at 11:36 am

    Free stuff at wal mart !!!! Yahooo 4 me Yahoo 4 you

  13. Avatar

    Anonymous Reply Report comment

    October 29, 2020 at 9:29 am

    RED meaning Republicans
    NOT RED for CHINA and Biden

  14. Avatar

    Anonymous Reply Report comment

    October 29, 2020 at 12:05 am

    The Donald soon to wear a jumpsuit with a color that matches his hair.

    • Avatar

      Anonymous Reply Report comment

      October 29, 2020 at 7:42 am

      Do you solemnly swear to meltdown completely when none of your stupid predictions ever come true?

      • Avatar

        Anonymous Reply Report comment

        October 31, 2020 at 12:38 pm

        HAhahahahah
        you will be a Trumpster Fire come November 4th
        HAhahahahahah

        • Avatar

          Anonymous Reply Report comment

          October 31, 2020 at 5:06 pm

          That’s exactly what you said four years ago, remember? Do we have a learning disability here?

  15. Avatar

    Anonymous Reply Report comment

    October 28, 2020 at 9:35 am

    She’s just another fake bitch wanting to get paid. Plus, nothing that comes out of New York is trustworthy or worth listening too, they are all a bunch of lying D-bags

    • Avatar

      Anonymous Reply Report comment

      October 28, 2020 at 9:41 am

      You are a moron. Donald Trump came from New York.

      • Avatar

        Anonymous Reply Report comment

        October 28, 2020 at 11:42 am

        Sorry cuomo

        • Avatar

          Anonymous Reply Report comment

          October 28, 2020 at 1:21 pm

          You are still a moron.

          • Avatar

            Anonymous

            October 28, 2020 at 6:44 pm

            still a step up from chump

          • Avatar

            Anonymous

            October 29, 2020 at 9:56 am

            Fine, you are a moronic chump.

  16. Avatar

    Anonymous Reply Report comment

    October 28, 2020 at 12:11 am

    He’s been raping the American people for almost 4 yrs and something is soon to be done about it.

  17. Avatar

    Anonymous Reply Report comment

    October 27, 2020 at 5:02 pm

    Trump is looking for a chump to pay for his misdeed and the chump is the American taxpayer. Not the only time he has done it, it won’t be the last.

  18. Avatar

    Anonymous Reply Report comment

    October 27, 2020 at 4:51 pm

    He raped his own daughter Ivanka!

  19. Avatar

    Anonymous Reply Report comment

    October 27, 2020 at 4:23 pm

    Here we go again, one last attempt, maybe.

  20. Avatar

    Tucker McPucker Reply Report comment

    October 27, 2020 at 2:43 pm

    Trump has been filthy rich for the last three decades. Beautiful women all around him, looking for a piece of the pie. Why would he rape some ugly dog in a changing room? Clearly another made up democrat story. Just like that gay B actor in Chicago and just like that lady trying to get at Judge Kavanaugh. Not even believable.

  21. Avatar

    astounded Reply Report comment

    October 27, 2020 at 12:24 pm

    Trump charged taxpayers $3 to serve him a glass of water at his own property. Think he wouldnt grab yer gramma’s hoochie woochie?

  22. Avatar

    MAGA man Reply Report comment

    October 27, 2020 at 11:51 am

    I just can’t believe my President would rape anyone. He has beautiful women all around him for years and never once accused of a crime. He ran beauty pagents and not accused. No one said a thing till now. When Biden is running. Check the dam laptop!

    #MAGA2020

    • Avatar

      Anonymous Reply Report comment

      October 28, 2020 at 4:55 pm

      You know his MAGA hats are made in China, Biden at least uses American labor for his hats

      • Avatar

        Anonymous Reply Report comment

        October 29, 2020 at 9:51 am

        Biden is not cool enough for hats. Nor are his mindless followers. Nobody would buy them. Adult diapers are more his style.

    • Avatar

      Anonymous Reply Report comment

      October 31, 2020 at 11:19 am

      You probably think you’re attractive to women, too. Rape has nothing to do with sex, it’s about power and humiliation, two of Trump’s favorite things. She probably refused to pee on him.

      • Avatar

        Anonymous Reply Report comment

        October 31, 2020 at 5:09 pm

        I’ve got some news for you: An awful lot of women find billionaires very attractive, no matter what they look like. A lot of adults know that already without it being explained.

        • Avatar

          Anonymous Reply Report comment

          November 1, 2020 at 8:55 am

          A lot of women find fat men attractive, some find Black men attractive, some find short men attractive, some find men in uniform attractive. What is your point? Most women find you in the closet?