司法部周二表示，根据威斯特福尔法案，它不再声称前总统唐纳德·特朗普当他涉嫌在2019年诽谤作家E. Jean Carroll时，他是在他作为美国总统的办公室和职业范围内行事。
这一发展为卡罗尔公司扫清了道路2019年首次诉讼就在同一天，卡罗尔的律师主张驳回特朗普在另一个相关案件中对卡罗尔提起的反诉。
五月的陪审团认定特朗普负有法律责任因为上世纪90年代在波道夫·古德曼的更衣室对卡罗尔进行了性侵犯，然后在2022年的一篇真实社交帖子中诽谤她，称她的指控是“骗局和谎言”但卡罗尔在2019年提起的最初诽谤诉讼，一直被法院捆绑在一起，原因是特朗普否认卡罗尔的强奸指控是否是他公务的一部分，正如他所说的那样。
如果是这样的话，司法部就会取代特朗普成为被告，案件也就没有意义了，因为联邦政府不能被指控诽谤。
相反，司法部周二表示，“缺乏足够的证据来得出这样的结论，即这位前总统受到了为美国政府服务的目的的充分驱动，以支持他否认对卡罗尔女士进行性侵犯并做出她在本次诉讼中质疑的其他关于卡罗尔女士的声明时，他是在他的就业范围内行事的决定。”
来自DOJ的消息来自司法部侵权处主任James Touhey给法院的一封信。
“特朗普精神状态的证据，其中一些是在该部上次做出认证决定后才曝光的，并不能证明他发表有争议的言论是出于为美国政府服务的‘不仅仅是微不足道的’目的，”这封信说。“在这里，虽然这些声明本身是在工作环境中做出的，但促使这些声明的指控与一个纯粹的个人事件有关:一场据称发生在特朗普当选总统几十年前的性侵犯。性侵犯显然与工作无关。”
E.2023年5月9日，简·卡罗尔走出纽约曼哈顿联邦法院。
约翰·明奇洛/美联社，档案
该申请标志着司法部的一个重大转变坚持自己的立场即使面对国会山民主党人的严厉批评，也要支持特朗普在此案中的辩护。
司法部长梅里克·加兰在2021年对参议院拨款委员会说:“司法部的工作和法律决策不是支持任何政府，无论是前任还是现任。”。“我们这样做的工作是确保遵守法治，这是民主、共和或代议制民主的基本要求。”
卡罗尔2019年的诉讼定于庭审在一月.
卡罗尔的律师罗伯塔·卡普兰在一份声明中说:“我们很感激司法部重新考虑了它的立场。”。“我们一直认为，唐纳德·特朗普在2019年6月对我们的客户发表诽谤性言论是出于个人敌意、恶意和恶意，而不是作为美国总统。”
特朗普的发言人没有立即回应美国广播公司新闻的置评请求。
与此同时，卡罗尔的律师周二为驳回上诉进行辩护特朗普提起的反诉针对卡罗尔在CNN上发表的评论，她赢得了与他的独立但相关的诉讼。
特朗普上个月起诉了卡罗尔，此前她在一次电视采访中坚称，尽管陪审团认为他对性侵犯的指控较轻，但他在更衣室强奸了她。
卡罗尔的律师在驳回申请的动议中表示，“卡罗尔的陈述不太可能带有诽谤的意思，基本上是真实的，没有恶意，并且受到公平报道特权的保护。”。
她的律师表示，特朗普没有理由提起反诉，他们说这“会给卡罗尔带来不必要的负担和巨大的费用，更不用说再次拖延这个本来已经准备好审判的案件了。”
特朗普的反诉是基于卡罗尔5月10日在美国有线电视新闻网(CNN)的露面，在此期间，她回答了关于陪审团裁定特朗普负有责任并判给她500万美元赔偿金的问题，特朗普已要求法院降低赔偿金。
"我只是想知道，E. Jean，当你听到这些的时候你脑子里在想什么?"一名CNN记者问卡罗尔，陪审团认定特朗普没有犯强奸罪。
“嗯，我只是立即在我自己的脑海里说，‘哦，是的，他做到了——哦，是的，他做到了。’这就是我的回答，”卡罗尔回答道。
她的律师在周二提交的文件中表示:“从法律角度来看，关于卡罗尔回忆的这一声明不是诽谤，因为它基本上是真实的。”。“特朗普并没有声称卡罗尔对自己的回忆撒了谎。换句话说，当她告诉CNN的记者，她在听陪审团裁决时曾想‘哦，是的，他是这么想的’，他并没有声称她撒谎。
DOJ reversal could clear way for Carroll's 1st lawsuit against Trump to proceed
The Justice Department said on Tuesday it was no longer claiming, under the Westfall Act, that former PresidentDonald Trumpwas acting within the scope of his office and employment as president of the United States when he allegedly defamed the writer E. Jean Carroll in 2019.
The development, which could clear the way for Carroll'sinitial 2019 lawsuitagainst then-President Trump to proceed, came on the same day that Carroll's attorney argued for the dismissal of a counterclaim Trump filed against Carroll in a separate but related case.
A jury in Mayfound Trump liablefor sexually assaulting Carroll in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room in the 1990s, then defaming her in a 2022 Truth Social post by calling her allegations "a Hoax and a lie." But Carroll's initial defamation lawsuit, filed in 2019, has been tied up in the courts over the question of whether Trump's denial of Carroll's rape claim was part of his official duties, as he argued.
If so, the Justice Department would have substituted for Trump as the defendant and the case would have been moot since the federal government cannot be sued for defamation.
Instead, the Justice Department said Tuesday 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."
Word from the DOJ came in a letter to the court from James Touhey, director of the Justice Department's torts branch.
"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," the letter said. "Here, 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."
The filing marks a major reversal for the Justice Department, which had repeatedlystood by its positionto bolster Trump's defense in the case even in the face of withering criticism from Democrats on Capitol Hill.
"The job of the Justice Department and making decisions of law is not to back any administration, previous or present," Attorney General Merrick Garland told the Senate Appropriations Committee in 2021. "And our job in doing so is to ensure adherence to the rule of law, which is a fundamental requirement of a democracy, or a republic or a representative democracy."
Carroll's 2019 lawsuit is scheduled for trialin January.
"We are grateful that the Department of Justice has reconsidered its position," Carroll's attorney, Roberta Kaplan, said in a statement. "We have always believed that Donald Trump made his defamatory statements about our client in June 2019 out of personal animus, ill will, and spite, and not as President of the United States."
A spokesperson for Trump did not immediately respond to a request for comment from ABC News.
Meanwhile, Carroll's attorneys argued Tuesday for the dismissal of thecounterclaim that Trump filedagainst Carroll for comments she made on CNN after she won her separate but related suit against him.
Trump sued Carroll last month after she insisted in a television interview that he had raped her in the dressing room despite the jury finding him liable for the lesser charge of sexual assault.
"Carroll's statements are not plausibly susceptible of a defamatory meaning, are substantially true, were uttered without actual malice, and are protected by the fair reporting privilege," Carroll's attorneys said in their motion to dismiss.
Her attorneys said there is no basis for Trump to proceed with a counterclaim, which they said "would impose on Carroll undue burden and significant expense, not to mention hold up yet again this otherwise trial-ready, much-delayed case."
Trump's counterclaim is based on Carroll's May 10 appearance on CNN during which she answered questions about the jury's verdict holding Trump liable and awarding her $5 million in damages, which Trump has asked the court to reduce.
"I just wonder, E. Jean, what went through your head when you heard that?" a CNN reporter asked Carroll about the jury's determination that Trump hadn't committed rape.
"Well, I just immediately say in my own head, 'Oh, yes, he did -- oh, yes, he did.' So that's my response," Carroll replied.
"This statement about Carroll's recollection was not defamatory as a matter of law because it was substantially true," her attorneys said in Tuesday's filing. "Trump does not allege that Carroll lied about her own recollections. In other words, he does not claim that she lied when she told CNN's reporters that she had thought 'Oh, yes, he did -- oh, yes, he did' while listening to the jury verdict."
