Legal experts responded on Tuesday after a jury in New York found former President Donald Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation.
The verdict sheet outlined how the jury should decide the liability for Trump, which required that they decide whether Trump raped Carroll, sexually abused her, or forcibly touched her. If he was culpable, responsible, or "guilty" in the informal sense, of that, they had to determine the amount she'd be awarded.
"The American public does not support a harasser running for president and the jury’s verdict in the Carroll case is bound to inflict substantial political damage for Trump in 2024," said former ethics czar Norm Eisen on Twitter.
National security and legal analyst Marcy Wheeler cited the upcoming CNN town hall as well, mockingly congratulating the network head Chris Licht, "whose shrewd scheduling will tie CNN’s brand to Trump’s sexual assault."
IN OTHER NEWS: ‘I’m floored’: Legal expert ‘astonished’ by massive payout to Carroll in Trump’s civil rape case
"CNN is going to cancel the town hall instead of platforming a sexual predator, right? RIGHT? [/sweet summer child sarcasm off]" mocked The Nation's legal analyst Elie Mystal.
Law school professor Maya Wiley proclaimed the verdict a significant moment for a survivor of Trump's abuse.
Carroll "stood up for herself and won! #Trump has more legal troubles, but this matters!" she said.
Lawyer Tristan Snell gave the rundown of Trump cases, explaining the former president "is now 0 for 4 in cases in NYC since 2016. Trump University - $25 million settlement Trump Foundation - $3 million; charity shut down Trump Organization - guilty of tax fraud re Weisselberg E. Jean Carroll - $5 million for sexual assault, defamation."
Legal analyst Elizabeth de la Vega cited NPR reporter Eric Deggans' comment, "So now the frontrunner for the GOP nomination has been ordered to pay millions for sexually abusing a woman."
"In response to a few questions, sexual assault under NY [law equals] 'the knowing, purposeful touching of a sexual or intimate part of another in order to gratify the sexual desire of either person,'" said legal analyst and former prosecutor Harry Litman. "Importantly, that's what her cause of action was, not rape."
Allison Gill, who runs a legal and political podcast, noted that she never could understand why the law distinguished penetrating someone with genitals vs. another object. In this case, the fact that it was unclear whether Trump put his penis inside of Carroll meant the difference between sexual abuse and rape.
"I’ll never understand why penetrating someone with ANYTHING isn’t rape," said Gill.
