E. Jean Carroll filed a request with the court to amend her filing in her remaining case against Donald Trump, asking to include his social media attacks on her after a jury found him liable for sexual assault and his further attacks and mockery of her suffering in his CNN town hall.
Now, an amendment adding additional incidents of (alleged) defamation after the first verdict has just been approved by the federal court hearing the case.
Amended complaints are filed and approved in courtrooms across the country every business day, but this one stands out for a few reasons.
Primarily, it could significantly change one of the most important aspects of the case — the decision about who exactly is the defendant — and the named defendant, Trump, has requested that the amended complaint be rejected.
Why is it so complicated in this case?
Well, the incidents of (alleged) defamation named in the original case all took place while Trump was in office as President of the United States.
If his statements were made in his capacity as president — as he argues — then the U.S. government steps in and takes his place as the defendant.
The new incidents that Carroll is adding to her case took place in May of 2023, though — long after Trump was out of office.
There is no realistic possibility he could have made those statements in his official capacity as president because he was not the president at the time.
Will the amended complaint push the U.S. to decide it’s not part of the case?
It seems likely on the surface, but the last filing by the Department of Justice in the case — in response to an order to answer that very question by June 9th — suggests that it’s not a sure thing. According to that filing:
“[W]e respectfully request that the Court afford the United States time after the Court decides the motion for leave to amend to allow the United States to reach a determination as to the scope-of-employment question.”
The government’s proposal was for the court to decide whether to accept the amended complaint, then give an additional thirty days for parties to confer and offer further motions.
Trump’s attorney, Alina Habba, meanwhile, filed a request for the amended complaint to be rejected, arguing that it’s too late in the proceedings for such an amendment and that the substance of the allegations is significantly changed because Carroll acknowledges that Trump was found liable for sexual assault, rather than rape.
The new ruling addresses both of these.
It grants the motion to amend and says that “as the court has granted plaintiff’s motion, [Trump’s] request is moot.”
As for the United States’ role, the order gives the DOJ until July 13 to make its decisions and file any response.
Carroll has until July 27 to offer any further response after that, and Trump has until August 3rd for any final rebuttals.
All we can say is “Stay tuned!”
