Command Palette

Search for a command to run...

Discover

DOJ Opens Criminal Probe into E. Jean Carroll’s Lawsuit Funding Disclosure

DOJ Opens Criminal Probe into E. Jean Carroll’s Lawsuit Funding Disclosure
View gallery

The U.S. Department of Justice has opened a criminal investigation into writer E. Jean Carroll, examining whether the woman who twice defeated President Donald Trump in civil court lied under oath about who was funding her lawsuits, according to multiple outlets on Wednesday. The probe, referred to prosecutors in the Northern District of Illinois, centers on a 2022 deposition in which Carroll said no one else was paying her legal fees, a statement now under scrutiny after revelations that a nonprofit tied to LinkedIn co‑founder Reid Hoffman helped cover some costs. bbc +1

Carroll, 82, won a $5 million verdict in 2023 after a New York jury found Trump liable for sexually abusing and defaming her, and an $83.3 million defamation award in 2024 over separate comments he made denying her allegation of a mid‑1990s assault at Bergdorf Goodman. cbsnews +1 The Justice Department’s move marked a dramatic reversal of roles: after years in which Carroll pursued Trump in civil court, federal prosecutors are now investigating whether she committed perjury, even as Trump continues to appeal the judgments against him. bbc +1

What Exactly Is DOJ Investigating?

Prosecutors are focused on a videotaped 2022 deposition in which Carroll, asked about litigation funding, said no one else was paying her legal fees. bbc +1 Court filings later disclosed that money routed through a nonprofit linked to Hoffman, a prominent Democratic donor and critic of Trump, had been used to help finance her case, prompting Trump’s attorneys to accuse Carroll’s team of having “conspired to conceal the truth for nearly six months.” nbcnews +1

The investigation is being run from the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Chicago, where Hoffman’s nonprofit has ties, a jurisdictional link officials described as routine. bbc +1 Any perjury charge would require prosecutors to prove Carroll knowingly made a materially false statement — a high bar complicated by a 2024 ruling from the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which said Carroll had “plausibly” testified that she had simply forgotten about the limited outside funding and was not involved in the financial arrangements. abcnews +1

Allegations of Retaliation and a Politicized Justice Department

The inquiry immediately sparked accusations that the Trump administration was using the Justice Department to punish one of the president’s most prominent accusers, adding to long‑running concerns about the department’s independence. Civil‑rights advocates and some legal scholars warned the case could chill other sexual‑assault survivors from coming forward if they fear their testimony might later be criminally scrutinized. abcnews +1 ABC News legal contributor James Sample called the probe a “significant tool” that, even without charges, can burden a target through legal costs and uncertainty. newsweek

Critics pointed to a broader pattern in which the Trump‑era DOJ has opened investigations into figures perceived as adversaries, from former FBI director James Comey to Democratic officials, while simultaneously backing Trump’s efforts to overturn or pause the Carroll judgments at the appellate and Supreme Court levels. ms +1 Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche — who previously represented Trump in the Carroll appeals — has formally recused himself from the case, a step meant to address conflict‑of‑interest concerns but that has not quieted charges of “weaponization” from opponents. bbc +1

The Bigger Picture

The Carroll probe sits at the intersection of perjury law, third‑party litigation funding and a Justice Department whose motivations are under intense partisan scrutiny. Any ultimate decision to bring charges will likely hinge not only on evidence about what Carroll knew in 2022, but on whether a jury would view the funding dispute as a material deception or a contested memory. For Trump, the investigation offers an opening to challenge the credibility of a woman whose accusations have already cost him nearly $90 million in verdicts; for Carroll and other accusers watching from afar, it underscores how speaking out can evolve into years of legal vulnerability long after a jury has ruled. cbsnews +2