• The US Supreme Court has rejected Donald Trump's appeal against a $5 million verdict in favor of E. Jean Carroll.
• The court upheld a jury's finding that Trump sexually abused and defamed the former columnist in the 1990s.
• Testimony from other women who allege similar misconduct by Trump was a key factor in the trial.
• Carroll initially presented her allegations in 2019, leading to multiple lawsuits against Trump.
• This ruling marks a major legal defeat for Trump, who continues to deny the allegations.

The US Supreme Court has declined President Donald Trump's appeal to overturn a jury verdict requiring him to pay $5 million to E. Jean Carroll. The jury had found that Trump sexually abused and defamed Carroll, a former columnist, during a 1996 incident in a New York department store, with the verdict confirmed by lower courts in 2024, according to CBS News and LA Times.

During the trial, which took place in 2023, jurors were presented with testimony from two other women who accused Trump of similar misconduct. This evidence was significant in establishing a precedent that influenced the jury's decision, as noted in rulings by the Reuters and BBC.

In statements to the court, Trump's attorneys argued that the trial was unfair due to the judge allowing such testimony, which they claimed was irrelevant and prejudicial. However, the appeals court maintained that this evidence was pertinent in illustrating a pattern of behavior, as affirmed by South China Morning Post and Le Monde.

Following the jury's decision, Carroll's attorney, Roberta Kaplan, emphasized that the Supreme Court's decision confirms that Trump must be held accountable for his actions. Kaplan stated, "His multiple efforts to appeal that verdict have all failed and today's ruling ends his quest to avoid accountability for his actions," according to Channel News Asia.

Trump has issued public denials, labeling the case a "witch hunt" and arguing that it was motivated by political bias against him. He previously characterized Carroll's claims as fabrications aimed at damaging his reputation and has stated he would continue to challenge these rulings in court, as reported by India Times and South China Morning Post.