Carroll v. Trump

Background

The opinion concerns whether the jury for the upcoming civil trial should be anonymous. An anonymous jury is one whose identifying information is withheld from the parties and the public. Carroll accused Trump of raping her in the mid-1990s and defaming her in public statements responding to her accusation. Trump denied the rape allegation and disputed whether his statements were legally actionable.

The trial was scheduled to begin on April 25, 2023. The court had asked the parties to state any objections to an anonymous jury. Neither Carroll nor Trump objected. Daily News, L.P., and the Associated Press, which were not parties to the case, opposed anonymity on the ground that juror identities were presumptively open to the public and press.

Court’s Analysis

The court explained that it may order an anonymous jury when there is a strong reason to believe jurors need protection and the court takes reasonable steps to reduce unfair effects on the defendant and protect the defendant’s fundamental rights. Although anonymous juries have most often been used in criminal cases involving risks such as jury tampering or retaliation, the court stated that this was not a reason to limit the practice to those cases.

Judge Kaplan found a strong likelihood that disclosure of the jurors’ identities would lead to unwanted media attention, attempts to influence the jurors, and harassment or worse by Trump’s supporters. He considered the trial’s extensive publicity, Trump’s statements about judges, public officials, and jurors in other matters, and the likely continuing coverage of the trial. The court did not decide whether any reported statements or actions by Trump amounted to incitement or violent rhetoric; it considered whether jurors might perceive themselves to be at risk.

The court assumed, without deciding, that the public’s presumptive right of access to civil proceedings ordinarily includes juror identities. It held that this presumption was not an unlimited right and was overcome here by the risk to juror privacy and safety. The court also stated that no less restrictive alternative had been suggested.

Order

The court ordered three protective measures: (1) the names, addresses, and places of employment of prospective jurors on the voir dire panel—the group questioned during jury selection—as well as selected jurors would not be disclosed; (2) selected jurors would remain together during recesses, and the U.S. Marshals Service would transport them to lunch or provide lunch as a group during the trial; and (3) selected jurors would be transported together or in groups at the beginning and end of each trial day from one or more undisclosed locations where they could gather or return to their residences.

This opinion addressed jury anonymity and related protective measures; it did not decide whether Carroll or Trump was right on the underlying rape or defamation allegations.