The Supreme Court is awaiting appeals from President Trump in two separate cases.
Mr. Trump’s personal lawyers have a July 15 deadline to challenge an 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision in his defamation lawsuit against CNN over the network comparing him to Hitler in its “Big Lie” election coverage, according to the high court’s docket.
In addition, the president’s lawyers are expected to appeal a lower court ruling blocking construction of his White House ballroom, according to the SCOTUSBlog website.
In either case, at least four justices would need to vote to hear an appeal before oral arguments could be scheduled.
Justice Clarence Thomas set a July 15 filing deadline in the CNN defamation case. Mr. Trump said the network defamed him in its 2024 election coverage, which used the term “Big Lie” to describe his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results, and during which guest commentators compared him to Hitler.
In a June 3 request for a 60-day extension to appeal the case to the high court, Mr. Trump’s lawyers said the dispute centers on CNN’s “use of false, malicious, and defamatory statements in thousands of broadcasts, and related publications, falsely accusing President Trump of taking the same actions that were taken by Adolf Hitler in the Nazi ’Big Lie’ campaign which led to the Holocaust.”
They argue that the network portrayed false comparisons as historical fact to a large audience.
“In reality, President Trump was lawfully pursuing then-unresolved, and now proven, claims about election irregularities in the 2020 presidential election,” the extension request states.
The president’s lawyers intend to ask the justices to decide whether a judge or a jury should decide if false statements and allegations are opinion or rise to the level of defamation.
Justice Thomas gave them a 30-day extension, until July 15.
The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a district court decision against Mr. Trump. The lower court reasoned that the CNN guests’ statements were opinions and that Mr. Trump did not prove “actual malice.”
Actual malice is a legal standard requiring the plaintiff — if a public figure — to prove the publisher of a statement acted with actual knowledge that the statement was false.
Justices Thomas and Neil M. Gorsuch have indicated an appetite to revisit the high court’s defamation precedent in 1964’s New York Times v. Sullivan decision, which limits politicians and public figures’ right to sue the press over allegedly false reporting.
Meanwhile, a Trump appeal is expected over the White House ballroom construction.
The Department of Justice last week told the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals that the construction has gone too far and cannot be stopped. A federal judge halted construction, saying Congress must approve the renovation.
Mr. Trump has demolished the East Wing of the White House to construct a 90,000-square-foot ballroom. The $400 million cost of the ballroom, which will be almost twice as large as the executive mansion, is to be covered by private donations.
The D.C. appeals court is expected to issue a decision in the coming weeks.
Contact the author
Please read our comment policy before commenting.