No. 25-573October Term 2025Dismissed
Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, Petitioner v. E. Jean Carroll
from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Case status
- Current stage
- Dismissed
- Latest event
- Dismissed
- Decision timing
- No window until argument is scheduled.
- What it's about
from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Question presented
1. Whether Federal Rule of Evidence 415 overrides Rule 403’s requirement to balance the probative value of temporally remote propensity evidence against its prejudicial effect before such evidence can be admitted? 2. Whether Federal Rule of Evidence 413(d) authorizes the admission of temporally remote propensity evidence that the defendant committed the “crime” of “sexual assault” when the alleged prior act did not constitute a crime or a sexual assault? 3. Whether Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b)(2) permits the admission of “modus operandi” or “corroboration” evidence of prior “bad acts” without establishing a non-propensity purpose of the evidence, such as identity, absence of mistake, or another enumerated exception in Rule 404(b)(2)?
- Case path
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit / Dismissed
- Area
Dismissed Supreme Court case
Briefing
What it's about
Trump is asking the Supreme Court to review whether lower courts wrongly admitted old prior-act evidence under several federal evidence rules. The petition focuses on when judges must weigh unfair prejudice and whether past acts can be used to suggest a pattern or corroborate claims.
Argument
The case is still at the petition stage, and no oral argument is scheduled yet. Trump argues the Court should review whether Rules 415, 413(d), and 404(b)(2) were used too broadly to admit temporally remote prior-act evidence.
Impact
The case could affect how federal judges handle older allegations or other past acts at trial. That matters to plaintiffs and defendants alike, because such evidence can strongly shape what a jury hears.
What is the dispute in Trump v. Carroll?
The petition challenges whether federal judges may admit old prior-act evidence under Rules 415, 413(d), and 404(b)(2). It says courts should more carefully limit prejudice and define proper uses.
Who could be affected if the Court takes this case?
Trial judges, civil plaintiffs, and defendants could be affected, especially in cases using past-act evidence. The stakes are whether juries hear older allegations or other bad acts.
What happens next in Trump v. Carroll?
The justices will decide whether to grant certiorari (hear the case) or deny review. No oral argument is scheduled yet.
Related cases
Grounding
- Grounding
- Primary materials plus reporting.
- Note
- Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.
- Checked
- Jul 23, 2026
- Method
- Methodology