'Obviously not job-related': DOJ denies Trump immunity in E. Jean Carroll defamation case
In a major reversal the U.S. Dept. of Justice has decided it is unable to represent Donald Trump in journalist E. Jean Carroll’s remaining defamation lawsuit against him. Because he had made the remarks during his time as president Trump had argued he should effectively be immune from any lawsuits, as is standard practice. The DOJ had previously claimed that Trump’s remarks were made in his role as president. It has now decided there is insufficient evidence to support that decision.
In a six-page letter addressed to Trump’s attorneys and Carroll’s attorney, and sent to Senior U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan as reported by The Messenger’s senior legal correspondent Adam Klasfeld, the DOJ says Trump’s actions are not protected under the Westfall Act, the law that provides immunity from being sued when a member of the federal government is acting in their official role.
“I write to inform you that, in light of the D.C. Court of Appeals’ clarification of the standard for respondeat superior liability under D.C. law…as well as new factual developments, the Department of Justice is declining to certify under the Westfall Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2679(d), that defendant Donald J. Trump was acting within the scope of his office and employment as President of the United States when he made the statements that form the basis of the defamation claims in plaintiff’s Amended Complaint in this action.”
The six-page letter also explains, “The Department has determined that it lacks adequate evidence to conclude that the former President was sufficiently actuated by a purpose to serve the United States Government to support a determination that he was acting within the scope of his employment when he denied sexually assaulting Ms. Carroll and made the other statements regarding Ms. Carroll that she has challenged in this action. The evidence of Mr. Trump’s state of mind, some of which has come to light only after the Department last made a certification decision, does not establish that he made the statements at issue with a ‘more than insignificant’ purpose to serve the United States Government.”
It also states, “Although the statements themselves were made in a work context, the allegations that prompted the statements related to a purely personal incident: an alleged sexual assault that occurred decades prior to Mr. Trump’s Presidency. That sexual assault was obviously not job-related.”
Bloomberg News’ Zoe Tillman adds the DOJ’s decision means “no absolute immunity as a federal employee,” and calls it a “major turn of events.”
MSNBC legal analyst Katie Phang explains this means that “Trump has to defend himself & the DOJ won’t substitute in on his behalf.”
“The DOJ says Trump, when he defamed E. Jean, was acting outside of the scope of his office and employment as President,” Phang adds. “This is the right decision and it should have been the decision from the beginning.”
Carroll won her first civil lawsuit against Trump, when a jury found him liable for defamation and sexual assault.