Six new cases joined the Supreme Court’s 2026-27 argument docket after the justices’ final scheduled pre-recess conference, while Trump’s bid to overturn the $5 million E. Jean Carroll verdict was denied without comment.
Trump had asked the court to review lower-court rulings that let jurors hear testimony from two other accusers and the 2005 “Access Hollywood” tape; the 2nd Circuit had said any error would not have changed the outcome.
The newly accepted cases span election law, parental rights, asylum status, immigration detention fees, trademark law and compensation for pipeline rights of way, including an Arizona proof-of-citizenship voter-registration dispute.
The court also sought the solicitor general’s views on two Pennsylvania mail-ballot dating cases and split internally on other denials, with Thomas, Gorsuch and Sotomayor each writing dissents in separate matters.
What does this case mean for future civil suits against powerful individuals for past conduct?
If an accuser faces a perjury probe, could it unravel a multi-million dollar civil verdict?
Supreme Court’s Refusal on Trump’s Appeal Finalizes $95 Million Carroll Judgment, Redefines Presidential Civil Liability
Overview
As of June 29, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly postponed its decision on Donald Trump’s appeal in the E. Jean Carroll civil case, delaying a final order for an unprecedented 15 times since February. This ongoing deferral has allowed Trump to avoid paying the substantial judgment awarded to Carroll, who had accused him of sexual assault in the 1990s. A New York jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation, initially awarding Carroll $5 million. The Supreme Court’s lack of explanation for these delays has drawn scrutiny, highlighting concerns about transparency and accountability in high-profile cases.