Judge Lewis Kaplan summarily rejected on Thursday adjudicated rapist Donald Trump’s attempt to toss out the $90+ million dollars in various judgments (plus interest) awarded to writer E. Jean Carroll after a jury found that Trump has sexually assaulted the woman in a department store dressing room in the 1990s.  Trump had sought a reduction in the penalty, but the Court wasn’t buying his arguments.

Mr. Trump’s argument is entirely without merit both as a matter of law and as a matter of fact for all of the reasons articulated in Ms. Carroll’s memorandum of law in opposition to his motion.46 Among other things, it ignores the fact that, as the jury and/or the Court concluded, Mr. Trump’s June 21 and 22 statements were false, defamatory, and made with both actual and common law malice. It ignores the fact that those defamatory statements were viewed between at least 85 to 104 million times, whereas there is no evidence at all as to the dissemination of The Cut article to which defendant seeks to assign all of the damages suffered by Ms. Carroll and which was not even alleged to have been defamatory. It ignores as well the fact that the jury was entitled to believe Ms. Carroll’s testimony as to the impact of the June 21 and 22 statements on her. And it ignores the lack of any persuasive legal authority supporting Mr. Trump’s contention.  Indeed, the law is clear that when competing theories and evidence are presented at trial, the issue of causation ultimately is one for the jury, which the Court should not ordinarily disturb.  In short, the argument–which Mr. Trump previously made to the jury, conspicuously without success, and which defies common sense–does not warrant dismissal as a matter of law.”