'Still winning at losing': Donald Trump trolled after appeals court denies motion to delay case over immunity claim in E Jean Carroll suit

NEW YORK CITY, NEW YORK: In a momentous legal decision, the 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals unequivocally denied former president Donald Trump's request to halt proceedings in the upcoming E Jean Carroll defamation trial.

The court's ruling on Thursday, December 28, stands as a pivotal development, allowing the trial to progress as scheduled on January 16.

Trump's legal team, in a court filing last week, sought a 90-day delay, asserting the need for time to contemplate appealing the court's previous rejection of his attempt to invoke presidential immunity as a defense.

The appeals court, however, unanimously rebuffed this request, noting that the former president had inexplicably waited three years to introduce the immunity defense in the defamation trial.

The court's decision rested on the timing of Trump's legal maneuvers. Despite Carroll initiating the defamation suit in November 2019 and Trump responding in January 2020, the introduction of the presidential immunity defense came only in January 2023.

The judges, in their ruling, expressed concerns that allowing Trump to employ this defense at this juncture would cause "undue prejudice" to Carroll.

Social media users troll Donald Trump over ruling

Social media echoed with celebrations from critics of Donald Trump.

"Still winning at losing. Let's keep that going," one posted on X (formerly Twitter).

"Finally a reasonable ruling," another wrote.

"Lol pay up Donnie," someone else quipped.

"This trial, also known as the 'You should have shut up when you had the chance' trial, is gonna sting... bigly," a comment read.

"Trump takes more L’s than anyone I know," another added.

This legal saga marks the second trial entwining Trump and E Jean Carroll, a magazine writer who accused Trump of raping her in the mid-1990s. The initial trial earlier this year resulted in a jury finding Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation, culminating in a $5 million damages award to Carroll—a verdict Trump is vigorously appealing.

Carroll vs Trump: Allegations and denials

E Jean Carroll, 79, was among over a dozen women who accused Donald Trump of sexual assault or harassment. In her gripping 2019 memoir, she detailed the alleged rape incident, claiming it occurred in the dressing room of a Manhattan department store.

Trump, in staunch denial, labeled Carroll a "nut job" who fabricated a "fraudulent and false story" solely to sell a memoir.

The upcoming trial pivots on Trump's remarks about Carroll during his presidency and after the $5 million verdict. Trump's disparaging comments, including referring to Carroll as a "whack job," will be at the forefront of the proceedings, anticipated to span three to five days.

Carroll's allegations against Trump opened a Pandora's box, inviting scrutiny into the former president's conduct toward women. In her 2019 memoir, Carroll disclosed the alleged rape incident and the subsequent silence she maintained, driven by fear of retaliation, shame, and the perceived responsibility for the attack.

The second trial delves into Trump's post-verdict comments against Carroll, such as labeling her a "whack job." It is a legal clash that holds broader implications for the ongoing discourse on presidential immunity, as Trump contends that these comments were part of his official duties as president, NBC News reported.

US District Judge Lewis Kaplan, in June, firmly rejected Trump’s immunity argument, ruling that presidential immunity is "not a 'get out of damages liability free' card."

Trump's attempt to employ the presidential immunity defense also extends to an election interference case brought against him by special counsel Jack Smith. However, US District Judge Tanya Chutkan recently ruled against Trump's immunity claim in that case, declaring that the former president was not shielded from criminal charges.

Trump, who has pleaded not guilty in the election interference case, swiftly appealed the ruling to the federal appeals court in Washington, DC. The Supreme Court, last week, rejected Smith’s plea for an expedited decision on the matter, prolonging the legal battles that continue to entangle the embattled former president.

This article contains remarks made on the Internet by individual people and organizations. MEAWW cannot confirm them independently and does not support claims or opinions being made online.