July 11 (UPI) — After a legal clarification, the U.S. Justice Department has changed its mind on former President Donald Trump‘s potential immunity from a defamation lawsuit filed by writer E. Jean Carroll.
Carroll, who won $5 million in damages earlier this year when a New York jury found Trump liable for sexual assault and defamation in a state court, has also filed a defamation case in federal court relating to remarks the former president made about her while he was president.
She has alleged the former president raped her in a New York City department store long before he was elected to the office. Trump has called her allegations a hoax, suggested they were a part of a conspiracy theory, denied ever seeing her and called her a “whack job.”
The Justice Department under the administrations of both Trump and President Joe Biden had previously defended Trump in the federal lawsuit because he made the remarks at issue to the media as president.
Brian M. Boynton, the principal deputy assistant attorney general, wrote a letter filed with the federal court Tuesday announcing the change of stance, according to court records obtained by UPI.
Boynton said the Justice Department changed its stance after a recent D.C. Court of Appeals decision related to the Westfall Act, a law that entitles federal employees to absolute immunity from liability for conduct performed within the scope of their employment.
The appeals court did not directly weigh in on whether Trump had been acting within the scope of his employment or not but set a procedure for how that question could be determined in the context of the Westfall Act. The Justice Department then applied that clarified standard to the Trump case.
Boynton said that, under the standards clarified by the appeals court, the Justice Department could consider “any history between the employee and the victim” that may be relevant as well as new evidence since the government previously made its decision to defend Trump.
“The circumstantial evidence of Mr. Trump’s subjective intent in making the allegedly defamatory statements does not support a determination in this case that he was sufficiently motivated by a desire to serve the United States Government,” the letter reads.
The appeals court decision also clarified that the law in Washington, D.C., does not hold that any statement can be deemed as having been made for official purposes just because it was made using official communication channels.
“Mr. Trump’s statements regarding Ms. Carroll continued after the former president left office, as indicated by new allegations,” the letter reads.
The Justice Department said that comments Trump made after leaving office were “substantially similar” to those he had made as president and this he “could not have been motivated by an interest in serving the United States Government.”
“And a jury has now found that Mr. Trump sexually assaulted Ms. Carroll long before he became president,” the letter reads.
“That history supports an inference that Mr. Trump was motivated by a “personal grievance” stemming from events that occurred many years prior to Mr. Trump’s presidency.”
Tuesday’s letter marks a significant blow to the former president’s defense. The Justice Department, by defending Trump, would have served as a substitute defendant, which would have likely led to the case being dismissed.
The defamation trial is expected to begin in January, around the start of the 2024 presidential primary season.