The clock is ticking on an $83.3 million verdict—and Donald Trump’s legal team is scrambling to freeze it before the Supreme Court decides whether a president can be sued for what he says. Late Tuesday night, they filed a motion demanding a stay, arguing that Trump’s official words as commander-in-chief should shield him from ever paying a dime.
Here’s the twist: E. Jean Carroll’s lawyers aren’t fighting the delay—on one brutal condition. They want Trump to pony up an extra $7.46 million to cover interest that’s been piling up while the original judgment crawled through appeals. Without that cash, the stay is dead in the water.
Trump’s attorney, Justin Smith, fired off a 24-page plea to the Second Circuit, declaring that the former president must be allowed to ask the Supreme Court whether presidential immunity really exists for statements made while in office. “Carroll does not oppose this motion,” the filing reads—a rare moment of agreement in a war that’s dragged on since 2019.
At the heart of the battle is the Westfall Act, a federal law designed to protect government employees from personal lawsuits over actions taken on the job. If Trump can prove he was speaking as president, that shield could shove the entire case onto the U.S. government itself—and away from his personal bank account.
The legal calculus is brutal. Carroll first sued for defamation in November 2019, during Trump’s first term, over his denial of her rape allegation. Now, with Trump eyeing another White House run and facing a cascade of other criminal and civil cases, his lawyers argue there’s a “reasonable probability” the Supreme Court will step in—and a “fair prospect” they’ll overturn the verdict.
They point to a blistering dissent from three Second Circuit judges who flagged “legal errors” on immunity and the Westfall Act. Without a stay, Trump could be forced to hand over $83.3 million—or watch his assets get seized—before the highest court even weighs in. “Ongoing irreparable harm,” Smith warns, “as the lower courts prepare to execute on the judgment.”
The motion itself is a ticking time bomb. It calls on the appeals court to freeze everything until the Supreme Court makes a final call on whether to hear the case. “Issuing the mandate now,” the filing insists, “would eviscerate the immunity the Supreme Court has recognized—and create a likely inability to recover funds if they reverse.”
Smith, the lawyer behind this maneuver, was nominated by Trump to be a federal judge just weeks ago. His confirmation hearings wrapped on April 15, adding another layer of political electricity to an already explosive legal showdown. The stakes couldn’t be higher: a former president fighting to keep his money, his reputation, and the very meaning of presidential power alive.
