In a sharp legal setback for former President Donald Trump, U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan has denied a request by Trump’s legal team to delay enforcement of an $83.3 million judgment awarded to writer E. Jean Carroll.

The decision, handed down in a federal court in New York, requires Trump to either pay the full amount or post a bond to cover it — or risk the court seizing assets to satisfy the judgment.

The case, which centers on claims of defamation following Carroll’s public accusation of sexual assault, is one of several legal battles currently facing the former president as he campaigns for a return to the White House in 2024.

The Origins of the Case

E. Jean Carroll, a former advice columnist for Elle, alleged in 2019 that Donald Trump sexually assaulted her in a dressing room at the upscale Manhattan department store Bergdorf Goodman during the mid-1990s.

Trump denied the allegation publicly, calling it “a hoax”, “a con job,” and even stating that “she’s not my type.”

Those public statements led Carroll to file a defamation lawsuit, arguing that Trump’s denials damaged her reputation and subjected her to ridicule and threats.

In 2023, a federal jury found Trump liable for defamation in relation to his statements. They awarded Carroll a staggering $83.3 million in damages — one of the largest defamation judgments ever leveled against a U.S. public figure.

Trump’s Efforts to Delay Payment

Following the verdict, Trump’s attorneys moved to stay the judgment — meaning they asked the court to delay its enforcement while they pursued an appeal.

They also filed for a reduction in the bond typically required to delay enforcement, proposing to post $24.5 million instead of the full amount plus interest, which would total approximately $91.6 million.

The legal team argued that they needed more time to evaluate appeal options and arrange financing, and claimed that Trump’s intent to appeal justified delaying enforcement.

But Judge Kaplan was not convinced.

Judge Kaplan’s Firm Rebuttal

In his 30-page ruling, Judge Kaplan rejected every element of Trump’s motion.

He stated that the defendant’s current situation — needing to either pay or secure a bond — was the result of his own actions and delays.

“Mr. Trump’s current predicament is a result of his own dilatory conduct,” Kaplan wrote.
“The judgment was entered months ago, and the defendant made no serious effort to secure a bond in that time.”

Kaplan emphasized that Trump had the financial means to comply and that there was no valid legal basis to reduce the bond amount. Under standard procedure, a defendant must secure the full value of the judgment plus interest to suspend enforcement during an appeal.

Kaplan also appeared skeptical of the assurances offered by Trump’s legal team that they would eventually post the full bond. He described the proposed partial bond as “legally and factually unsupported.”

Reactions From Trump’s Camp

Trump’s team quickly responded to the ruling with sharp words.

Spokesman Steven Cheung, representing Trump’s campaign, issued a statement decrying the decision as another example of the “lawless witch hunt” targeting the former president.

“President Trump has already filed a timely motion to stay the judgment,” Cheung said.
“We remain confident that the rule of law will prevail and that truth will ultimately triumph.”

The statement also repeated Trump’s long-standing claim that the case is politically motivated — a narrative he has used in response to multiple legal entanglements over the last few years.

Carroll’s Legal Team Pushes for Immediate Enforcement

Carroll’s attorneys opposed Trump’s request from the outset.

They argued that delaying enforcement would reward delay tactics and diminish the weight of the jury’s verdict. They also questioned whether Trump could be trusted to follow through on any future commitments to post bond or pay the judgment.

One member of Carroll’s legal team described Trump’s court filings as the “legal equivalent of a paper napkin” — lacking substance or enforceable guarantees.

Their stance was clear: the judgment was rendered, and Trump needed to comply like any other citizen.

What Happens If Trump Doesn’t Pay?

Without a stay in place, Carroll’s legal team is now free to begin enforcement proceedings.

That could include placing liens on Trump’s assets, seizing property, or garnishing financial accounts to recover the full judgment amount.

Trump still has the option to post a bond at any time to prevent enforcement, but it must now cover the full $91.6 million, not the smaller amount he proposed.

Legal experts say this puts Trump in a tight spot — especially as he faces mounting legal costs across multiple criminal and civil cases.

Trump’s Broader Legal Headaches

This defamation judgment is just one of many legal battles Trump is navigating in 2024.

He is currently under indictment in multiple jurisdictions, including charges related to election interference, classified documents, and business fraud.

In total, Trump faces dozens of felony counts — and potential trials that could extend deep into the election season.

He has also been ordered to pay $5 million in an earlier civil case involving Carroll, bringing his total financial exposure from just her lawsuits alone to nearly $90 million.

Public and Political Fallout

While Trump’s base has remained largely loyal, these ongoing legal defeats could complicate his efforts to secure independent and swing voters, particularly if voters begin to associate his name more with courtrooms than campaign stops.

At the same time, critics of Trump point to this ruling as evidence that the rule of law applies equally, regardless of political status or power.

Democratic lawmakers have seized on the moment to call for greater accountability, while Republican allies have largely rallied to Trump’s defense, accusing the courts of bias.

A Test of Legal and Political Durability

The denial of Trump’s request to delay payment represents more than just a legal hurdle — it’s a stress test for his political future, financial stability, and credibility with voters.

If Trump is forced to sell assets or scramble for financing to cover the judgment, it could tarnish his image as a wealthy, unbreakable mogul.

If he refuses to pay and courts move to seize property, it would mark one of the most high-profile enforcement actions against a former president in U.S. history.

The Path Ahead

Trump’s legal team says they will appeal both the verdict and the denial of the stay.

But unless an appellate court intervenes quickly, Trump will be required to post bond or begin paying up in full — fast.

Legal analysts believe this case, along with others, could determine how voters view Trump’s leadership, judgment, and legal integrity in the lead-up to 2024.

For now, the message from the federal bench is clear: verdicts matter, and money talks.