Latest news with #WestfallAct
CBS News
22-04-2025
- Politics
- CBS News
Justice Department effort to step in for Trump in E. Jean Carroll case "nearly 2 years too late," her lawyers say
Lawyers for the writer E. Jean Carroll say the Department of Justice should not be allowed to stand in for President Trump in his appeal of a jury's decision to award her $83.3 million. It's the second time Mr. Trump has sought the Justice Department's protection in the case, but Carroll's attorneys said his "13th hour" effort "comes nearly two years too late." Carroll is opposing an effort by the Justice Department, which is a taxpayer-funded agency, and Mr. Trump's personal attorneys, to shield Mr. Trump from damages. The government and Mr. Trump say the Westfall Act, which protects federal workers from lawsuits related to conduct within the scope of their employment, entitles him to absolute immunity from personal lawsuits. A unanimous federal jury found in Carroll's favor in January 2024, concluding that Mr. Trump made defamatory statements when denying that he sexually abused Carroll. The Justice Department had stepped in on Mr. Trump's behalf during Mr. Trump's first presidency and more than half of former President Joe Biden's term in the White House, but that protection was rescinded after another jury in 2023 found Mr. Trump liable for sexually abusing Carroll, as well as separate defamation allegations. She was awarded $5 million by the jury in that case. Mr. Trump has denied all of Carroll's allegations and appealed both cases. Carroll's lawyers, led by Roberta Kaplan, said Monday that Mr. Trump missed a court ordered deadline for "a second (or third, or fourth) bite at the apple," referring to Westfall protections. After the Justice Department reversed course in 2023, the judge presiding over the case gave Mr. Trump a July 13, 2023 deadline to further pursue the Westfall issue. He did not. Carroll's lawyers wrote he instead pursued the "last-ditch claim of presidential immunity," which was rejected — as it relates to this case — later that year. They argue the plain text of the Westfall Act means the clock ran out when Mr. Trump's civil trial began in January 2024. The law says that a federal employee who is sued may pursue Westfall certification "at any time before trial," Carroll's lawyers wrote. "It would be patently unfair to permit a defendant to wait to learn the results of a trial before asserting a defense under the Westfall Act," they wrote. That conclusion jibes with an analysis by Northwestern School of Law professor James Pfander, who highlighted to CBS News the Westfall Act's use of "before trial." "The statute would seem to suggest that a motion to substitute at the appellate stage of the litigation comes too late," Pfander said on April 16. In a book excerpt published in New York magazine in 2019, Carroll accused Mr. Trump of sexually assaulting her in a department store dressing room in the mid-1990s. Mr. Trump denied the allegations and called Carroll a "whack job." He said he had never met Carroll, accused her of "totally lying" and said, "she's not my type." She sued him for defamation later that year. The Justice Department said in an April 11 filing that Mr. Trump was acting in his official capacity as president when he made the allegedly defamatory statements. The Justice Department and Mr. Trump's lawyers argue the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit is required to substitute the United States for Mr. Trump in the case. Carroll's lawyers noted that the case history includes several findings to the contrary. "Every decisionmaker to reach the question (with the exception of Trump and the Department of Justice when it has been under his control) has concluded that Trump acted outside the scope of his employment when he denied an accusation of 'personal wrongdoing' concerning a sexual assault that he committed years before he ever ran for office," they wrote.
Yahoo
18-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trump's Justice Department Steps In for Him on E. Jean Carroll Appeal
The Justice Department is looking to intervene on behalf of President Donald Trump in his appeal of the defamation verdict awarded to E. Jean Carroll, who accused him of sexually assaulting her in a New York department store dressing room. In a joint motion filed last week with Trump's legal team, the Justice Department said the federal Westfall Act, which provides immunity to government employees for actions taken within the scope of their duties, should apply to Trump. The department argued that the U.S. government should therefore be substituted as the defendant in the case, CBS News reported. Trump was ordered to pay $83.3 million in damages by a federal jury in 2024 for defamatory comments he made denying Carroll's allegations of sexual abuse. A separate federal jury in 2023 found him liable for sexual abuse against Carroll and instructed him to pay her $5 million, but he has denied all of the allegations and appealed both cases. He made the allegedly defamatory statements in 2019, while he was in office during his first term as president. The DOJ, which is led by Attorney General Pam Bondi, claimed in the new filing that Trump was acting in his official capacity when he made the remarks. James Pfander, a professor at Northwestern School of Law told CBS News that as 'a legal issue ultimately for the courts, the [Justice Department's] certification alone does not decide the question' of whether Trump's remarks fall within the scope of the presidency. In 2019, Carroll accused Trump of sexually assaulting her in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room in the mid-1990s. He denied the allegations by claiming that he had never met the advice columnist, calling Carroll a 'whack job' and accusing her of 'totally lying.' Kirsten Wilkinson, the director of the Justice Department's Torts Branch Civil Division, wrote in an exhibit included with the case's latest filing, 'I find that Donald J. Trump was acting within the scope of his office or employment at the time of the incidents out of which the plaintiff's claims arose.' But Pfander argued that invoking the Westfall Act after a trial may come too late. The law, he said, was designed to shield federal employees before they face trial. One of Trump's attorneys argued last year that the case should be dismissed under the Supreme Court's broad ruling on presidential immunity, which shields presidents from criminal prosecution for 'official acts.' Carroll's attorney Roberta Kaplan, however, slammed that argument in a January brief: 'If there were ever a case where immunity does not shield a president's speech, this one is it.'
CBS News
17-04-2025
- Politics
- CBS News
Justice Department wants to step in for Trump in E. Jean Carroll appeal
The Department of Justice wants to stand in for President Trump in his ongoing appeal of a defamation case that could cost him tens of millions of dollars. Lawyers for the taxpayer-funded agency and Mr. Trump's personal attorneys said in a filing on April 11 that the Justice Department believes the federal Westfall Act shields Mr. Trump in the case, which has pitted him against the writer E. Jean Carroll. A federal jury awarded Carroll $83.3 million in January 2024, after concluding that Mr. Trump made defamatory statements when denying that he sexually abused Carroll. That award came less than a year after a separate federal jury concluded Trump was liable for sexual abuse , and instructed him to pay her $5 million. Mr. Trump has denied all of Carroll's allegations and appealed both cases. The Justice Department asserts that Mr. Trump was acting in his official capacity as president when he made the allegedly defamatory statements about Carroll in 2019, and therefore the court is required to substitute the United States for Mr. Trump in the case. Under the Westfall Act, federal employees are entitled to absolute immunity from personal lawsuits for conduct occurring within the scope of their employment. Legal scholar James Pfander said Mr. Trump still needs to show that his actions, publicly denying Carroll's claims, were within the scope of the presidency. "As a legal issue ultimately for the courts, the [Justice Department's] certification alone does not decide the question," said Pfander, a Northwestern School of Law professor. Pfander noted that the Westfall Act says it permits government employees to petition courts to certify they were acting within the scope of their office "at any time before trial." "By allowing an employee to pursue certification but limiting the time to 'before trial,' the statute would seem to suggest that a motion to substitute at the appellate stage of the litigation comes too late," Pfander said. A longtime advice columnist, Carroll published a book excerpt in New York magazine in 2019 accusing Mr. Trump of sexually assaulting her in a department store dressing room in the mid-1990s. Mr. Trump denied the allegations and called Carroll a "whack job." He claimed he had never met Carroll, accused her of "totally lying" and said, "she's not my type." Mr. Trump would go on to repeat similar denials in public appearances, social media posts and depositions. The Justice Department initially supported Mr. Trump's effort to have the case dismissed, arguing the Westfall Act protected Mr. Trump from liability because he was acting as a federal employee when he denied Carroll's allegations. A lawyer for the department argued in 2021 — while Mr. Trump was out of office after losing the 2020 election to former President Joe Biden — that even though Mr. Trump "made crude and offensive comments in response to the very serious accusations of sexual assault" the law protecting employees from such a suit should be upheld. The agency reversed its position in July 2023. An official for the Justice Department wrote at the time that the decision factored in the jury's conclusion in the $5 million case that Mr. Trump was liable for sexual abuse. "The allegations that prompted the statements related to a purely personal incident: an alleged sexual assault that occurred decades prior to Mr. Trump's Presidency," former Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Brian Boynton wrote. "That sexual assault was obviously not job related." Paul Figley, a former deputy director of the Justice Department's Torts Branch, said Boynton's decision was unexpected. "I was very surprised by the withdrawal because we always viewed the president as behaving within the scope of office for anything he did," said Figley, an American University professor emeritus who worked at the Justice Department for more than three decades. An exhibit included with the case's latest filing shows that the Justice Department, now under the purview of Mr. Trump, has again reversed course. "I find that Donald J. Trump was acting within the scope of his office or employment at the time of the incidents out of which the plaintiff's claims arose," wrote Kirsten Wilkinson, the director of the agency's Torts Branch Civil Division. Columbia Law School professor Caroline Polisi said she believes the decision fits a pattern within the Trump administration. "This is not at all a surprising move for this Justice Department. Trump has shown time and time again that he considers this DOJ to be his personal attorney," said Polisi, a federal criminal defense attorney "On their face, the comments at issue were purely personal in nature, and therefore outside of his scope of duties as president, thus excluding him from governmental immunity," said Polisi. "However, the fact that the former administration took the same position - at least initially - shows that the argument is not entirely frivolous, and that a court may entertain arguments on the issue." The highest ranks of the Justice Department are filled with lawyers who just last year were Mr. Trump's personal attorneys, but Figley said Wilkinson does not fit that description. He noted she's risen steadily while serving through multiple administrations, before being appointed director in January. "That appointment was an obvious choice, she'd been the deputy director in that office for many years, and the previous director retired," Figley said. A lawyer for Mr. Trump also argued last year that the case should be dismissed due to a Supreme Court ruling granting presidents immunity from criminal prosecution for "official acts"while they are in office. Roberta Kaplan, an attorney for Carroll, argued in a January brief that the Supreme Court's ruling did not apply to Carroll's claims. "If there were ever a case where immunity does not shield a president's speech, this one is it," Kaplan wrote. Kaplan declined to comment Wednesday on Mr. Trump's latest move, telling CBS News her response was forthcoming in opposition papers she expects to file next week.
