On March 4th, 2021, former President Donald Trump was ordered to provide a DNA sample in the defamation and battery lawsuit brought against him by writer E. Jean Carroll. This order came after a year-long legal battle between the two parties, with Carroll accusing Trump of sexually assaulting her in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room in the mid-1990s.
In response to the order, Trump released a statement through his spokesperson, Liz Harrington, stating that he had never met Carroll and that her allegations were “completely false.” He also criticized the court’s decision, calling it a “total disgrace” and a “witch hunt.”
This is not the first time Trump has faced accusations of sexual assault or harassment. During his presidency, numerous women came forward with allegations against him, including adult film star Stormy Daniels and former Apprentice contestant Summer Zervos. Trump has denied all of these allegations and has often attacked his accusers publicly.
Carroll’s lawsuit is unique in that it is still ongoing despite Trump’s departure from office. In November 2020, the Justice Department attempted to intervene in the case, arguing that Trump was acting in his official capacity as president when he denied Carroll’s allegations and therefore could not be sued. However, a federal judge rejected this argument, allowing the case to proceed.
The case has also raised questions about the statute of limitations for sexual assault cases. Carroll did not file a police report or press charges at the time of the alleged assault, which occurred over 20 years ago. However, she argues that she did come forward with her story in a 2019 book and subsequent interviews, and that Trump’s denials of her allegations constituted defamation.
The outcome of the case remains uncertain, but it has already had significant implications for how sexual assault allegations are handled in the legal system. It has also highlighted the ongoing debate over whether or not a sitting president can be sued for actions taken before or during their time in office.
Regardless of the outcome, the case serves as a reminder of the importance of taking allegations of sexual assault and harassment seriously and holding those responsible accountable for their actions.
