Trump Taking Legal Battle Against Hillary Clinton to Supreme Court
They may have been friends in the past, but ever since they faced off in the 2016 election, President Donald Trump and former First Lady Hillary Clinton have been at war with each other, figuratively speaking.
Now, their fight is about to escalate to the nation’s highest court.
Trump is continuing his long-running legal battle against Clinton by asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review a lower court ruling that dismissed his civil conspiracy claims and imposed nearly $1 million in sanctions.
Justice Clarence Thomas this week granted Trump’s request for additional time to file a petition asking the Supreme Court to hear the case.
Trump now has until Sept. 9 to submit his petition in Trump v. Clinton, which stems from allegations that Clinton and others helped promote claims that Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign colluded with Russia.
The extension is a routine procedural action and does not reflect any opinion on the merits of the case.
As the justice assigned to matters arising from the relevant federal circuit, Thomas handles administrative requests such as filing extensions.
The Supreme Court will decide whether to hear the appeal only after the petition is filed, and at least four justices must vote to grant review before the case can proceed.
Trump’s legal team filed the extension motion on July 23 at the Supreme Court.
In it, his lawyers argued the forthcoming petition will raise “exceptionally important” issues and that the appellate ruling and sanctions order “carries with it profound impact on the Presidency, and the nation as a whole.”
Trump’s appeal is expected to focus not only on the underlying allegations surrounding the Russia investigation but also on the broader legal question of when courts may impose sanctions against a president and his attorneys for filing civil litigation.
The federal appeals court that reviewed the case sharply criticized the lawsuit, concluding that many of the legal arguments advanced by Trump and his attorney, Alina Habba, lacked merit.
The court upheld sanctions totaling nearly $1 million against Trump, Habba, and her New Jersey-based law firm.
The sanctions represent a significant financial penalty, and Trump’s appeal is expected to address both the underlying lawsuit and the broader authority of courts to impose substantial sanctions on litigants whose claims are found to lack legal merit.
Trump’s original complaint alleged that Hillary Clinton and others conspired to promote a false narrative linking his 2016 presidential campaign to Russian election interference.
The district court dismissed those claims, and the federal appeals court upheld that decision. The filing seeking additional time to petition the Supreme Court did not identify the specific appellate circuit that issued the ruling.
The Clinton lawsuit is one of several cases Trump is currently asking the Supreme Court to review.
In a separate defamation lawsuit against CNN over the network’s use of the phrase “big lie” to describe Trump’s claims regarding the 2020 election, Thomas also granted Trump additional time to file his petition. That filing is due Aug. 14.
Trump is also continuing his legal challenge in the E. Jean Carroll case.
After the Supreme Court declined to hear his initial appeal last month, he filed a petition for rehearing on July 8, asking the justices to reconsider the damages award entered against him, which the high court agreed to do in an unusual move.
Together, the three petitions place multiple Trump-related legal disputes before the court, each involving distinct legal questions ranging from sanctions and defamation to civil liability.
Clinton has not publicly commented on the Supreme Court’s decision to grant Trump additional time to file his petition.
Although she is named as a defendant in the lawsuit, the court filings do not indicate that she took any separate action in connection with the extension request.
The additional defendants identified in Trump’s original complaint were not specified in the available court records.
The lawsuit stems from Trump’s longstanding contention that allegations linking his 2016 presidential campaign to Russian election interference were knowingly promoted through false or misleading claims.
BREAKING: Dolly Parton’s Cause Of Death Revealed: ‘Brief Battle’
Dolly Parton’s death came after a brief battle with cancer, her representatives revealed Tuesday.
The country music legend died Aug. 25 at Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center in Nashville. She was 80.
Parton had been admitted to the cancer center Friday, four days before her death. Her representatives confirmed the cancer diagnosis in a statement to PEOPLE but did not disclose what type she had.
“Our beloved Dolly Parton spent her life and career bringing joy, laughter, hope and integrity into everything she touched. Her unmatched generosity reached the lives of countless people whom she would never meet, yet she was always there to offer a helping hand,” the statement read.
“Whether it be the hundreds of millions of books donated through her invaluable Imagination Library or funding research that helped create a lifesaving vaccine used around the world, Dolly’s unconditional love for all people was the guiding force for her lasting impact. After bravely facing a brief battle with cancer, Dolly departed her Earthly life today at the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center surrounded by loved ones,” the statement concluded.
The “Jolene” singer had also been dealing with kidney and autoimmune issues before her death, PEOPLE previously reported.
Just days earlier, Dolly Parton opened up about her declining health and acknowledged that she had put off addressing some medical issues while caring for her husband, Carl.
“As I’ve shared in video messages throughout the past year, I am dealing with some health issues that I just didn’t pay attention to when I was watching over [my husband] Carl. You know, this isn’t the first time I’ve had to manage something like this. Back in the early ’80s, I was down for several months with female issues, and I was struggling with my weight at the time too, so it’s not like I haven’t been through hard times with my health,” Parton told PEOPLE.
Her nephew, Bryan Seaver, announced her death in an Instagram video Tuesday on behalf of the Parton and Owens family.
“My name is Bryan Seaver, son of Cassie Parton, and I’m representing the Parton and Owens family today announcing the passing of my aunt, Dolly Rebecca Parton Dean, Sister, Sis and Granny to one generation and Gigi to the next,” he says in the video.
Seaver, who served as Parton’s head of security for more than two decades, said she had asked him years earlier to deliver the announcement.
“This video announcement is something Dolly asked of me years ago, before I fully absorbed it as a future reality,” he continued. “As her head of security for more than two decades, a role my father Larry held before me, I have imagined the heaviness of this moment but haven’t truly felt it until now.”
Seaver said the moment brought immense pride and heartbreak, but he took comfort in his faith that Parton had been reunited with Carl and other loved ones.
Seaver added: “It is an honor, an honor that is mixed with absolute pride and great sadness. But sadness lies with us, not with Dolly. Dolly has lived in the light and is in the arms of Jesus, surely met by Carl, her parents and countless othe
Shocking 'truth' behind Prince Harry's decision to quit major role
Prince Harry should have "resigned in disgrace" from the board of a controversial African wildlife charity, a commentator says. James Walker makes the bombshell remark in Wednesday's episode of this publication's podcast, Daily Expresso.
He and the show's host, JJ Anisiobi, delve into the Duke of Sussex's dramatic decision to step down from African Parks. James, commenting on the controversy, said: "When you hear about this stuff and how long it's been going on for, you should be resigning in disgrace. [Harry] should be saying: 'I'm not touching that with a barge pole. That is a failed entity. We're going nowhere near it'.
"But no. He's still saying he's going to 'support their mission'. And again this Caroline Pearce, executive director of Survival International, goes on to say: 'His departure doesn't undo that record'.
"She alleged that African Parks was aware of the abuses for years, but it was only after Survival complained to Harry that the charity finally commissioned an investigation."
James added: "Well, she's got a point."
It emerged on Monday (August 24) that Harry was no longer a board member of the wildlife charity.
The conservation organisation has admitted that human rights abuses were committed by its rangers against members of the semi-nomadic Baka group in Congo-Brazzaville.
African Parks has said since that it has improved its safeguarding processes both in the Odzala-Kokoua National Park and institutionally.
Its admission followed an independent human rights investigation into allegations guards managed and paid by the charity had beaten, raped and tortured indigenous people in Odzala-Kokoua National Park.
Harry was president of the charity for six years before he became a member of its board of directors in 2023.
A spokesman for the Duke said he remains an active and avid supporter of African Parks. He added: "The Duke is proud of his 10 years with African Parks and fully supports the ongoing strengthening of its board.
"His commitment to conservation in Africa continues and he remains a supporter of African Parks’ mission."
Human rights organisation, Survival International, said it had been calling on Harry to step down from African Parks for years.
The group's director, Caroline Pearce, said in a statement: "It’s outrageous that for 10 years Prince Harry has served African Parks while the organisation has been responsible for abuse and violence against Indigenous people.
"His departure doesn't undo that record — African Parks itself must now be held accountable, and must abandon this model of fortress conservation for good."
Survival International said indigenous peoples know how best to manage their land and the idea outsiders know better is racist and colonial.
