Trump Lawyers Tell Court U.S. Should Take His Place in Defamation Suit to Protect Presidency

Lawyers representing former President Donald Trump are arguing that the U.S. government should take his place as the defendant in a defamation trial.

Alina Habba, who is representing Trump, and the Justice Department argue that he was acting as president in 2019 when E. Jean Carroll accused him of raping her. Due to his status at the time, they claim that the U.S. government should become the defendant in Carroll's defamation case against the former president. Despite a federal court ruling against it in October, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals could consider this as the lawsuit trial progresses.

According to the Associated Press, "federal law makes it difficult to sue U.S. government employees for job-related actions." Another law sometimes prevents libel and slander claims against the government from going forward. If implemented, Carroll's case could be struck down.

Habba claimed in court that Trump "was on the defensive" when addressing Carroll's allegations. After she went forward, he said that she was "totally lying" with her claims while also adding that she was "not [his] type."

"When somebody says he did a heinous crime 20 years ago," Habba explained, "he needs to address it."

However, Carroll's lawyers argued that his response was inappropriate, especially as a government official. Joshua Matz told the court that working at the White House was no excuse "to brutalize someone who was a victim of a prior attack."

Carroll is suing Trump for slandering her while denying her allegations of rape. She said that he had sexually assaulted her in a New York City dressing room in the 1990s. Her suit seeks unspecified damages, as well as a retraction of his statements.

For more reporting from the Associated Press, see below.

Federal appeals judges asked Friday whether a U.S. president's every remark is part of the job as they weighed whether Trump can be held liable in a defamation case that concerns his response to a rape allegation.

But the judges floated multiple questions about private and public conduct for the commander-in-chief: Is everything a president says work-related? Does it become so if reporters are there?

Can saying that a woman is "not my type," as Trump did, be part of public service? Should presidents need to mind their language constantly for fear that losing their cool could cross a line into legal responsibility?

Habba argued that the claim essentially questioned his fitness for office.

Carroll is a former longtime Elle magazine advice columnist.

Trump said that he and Carroll never met, dismissing a 1987 photo of the two and their then-spouses as a momentary encounter at a social event. In the final months of the Republican's presidency, the Justice Department sought to replace him as defendant in Carroll's case. The department has maintained its position during Democratic President Joe Biden's administration.

Justice Department lawyer Mark Freeman told the appeals court Friday he wasn't out to "defend or justify" Trump's comments, calling them "crude and offensive."

"I'm here because any president facing a public accusation of this kind, with the media very interested, would feel obliged to answer questions from the public, answer questions from the media," Freeman said.

After the hearing, Carroll called on the appeals court to reject what she called a "dangerous strategy" from the government and Trump.

"In no world was Donald Trump upholding the office of the presidency when he claimed I was 'not his type' and called me a liar," she said in a statement. "His comments were personal attacks meant to punish me for daring to speak the truth."