The ‘Islamic NATO’ Is Not NATO 
The Northern Sea Route: China’s Emerging Alternative to Suez 
Southeast Asia’s Fragmented Environmental Governance 
The Supreme Court on Monday rejected a push by President Donald Trump to throw out a jury’s finding that he sexually abused the writer E. Jean Carroll at a New York City department store in the mid-1990s and later defamed her.
The High Court declined to take up the case in a brief, unexplained order, as is typical. There were no noted dissents.
Trump’s lawyers had argued that allegations leading to the US$5 million verdict were propped up by “highly inflammatory” evidentiary rulings, including those that allowed the testimony of two other women who accused Trump of sexual abuse decades ago.
Trump has denied all three women’s allegations.
Trump’s lawyers argued the judge had broken federal evidence rules in the case. They framed it as a distraction from Trump’s unique duties as president, though the verdict came before his return to the White House.
“This mistreatment of a President cannot be allowed to stand,” Attorney Justin D. Smith wrote in court documents.
Don't Miss:
-
No immunity: how Xi’s anti-corruption fighters are zeroing in on fresh targets
-
Book about Putin’s private life which ‘reads like a spy novel’ wins French literary prize
-
Africa knows who its true friends are – and they’re not in Washington
-
Trump says China is driving anger at US data centres. These residents disagree
-
US Secret Service aware of Iranian video threat to assassinate Barron Trump