A federal jury found Donald Trump liable for sexually abusing E. Jean Carroll in 2023. A second jury ordered him to pay her $83 million in a defamation case in 2024. Carroll won. Trump lost. Now his Justice Department is investigating her.
The DOJ opened a criminal probe this week into the nonprofit that helped fund Carroll’s legal fees. The theory: in a 2022 deposition, Carroll said she received no outside funding for her lawsuit. It was later revealed that Reid Hoffman, a Democratic donor and LinkedIn co-founder, had paid some of her legal costs through a nonprofit called American Future Republic. Prosecutors are now examining possible perjury, money laundering, and obstruction.
The investigation is not happening in a vacuum. It is part of a pattern.
The Carroll Investigation
The perjury theory centers on a narrow question: did Carroll know, at the time of her 2022 deposition, that Hoffman’s money was funding her case? Carroll’s attorneys have maintained she did not. The DOJ referred the matter to federal prosecutors in Chicago, where Hoffman’s nonprofit is based.
The timing is notable. Carroll beat Trump twice in federal court. She was awarded $5 million after a jury found Trump sexually abused her. She was awarded $83 million more after a jury found Trump defamed her by calling her a liar. The criminal probe targeting her came after both verdicts were final.
Senator Adam Schiff, who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee, called the investigation part of a broader campaign of targeting Trump’s critics. He is not wrong. The Carroll probe fits a documented pattern of the DOJ opening investigations into people who have publicly opposed, sued, or investigated the president.
The Pattern
The Carroll investigation did not come out of nowhere. Since January 2025, Trump’s Justice Department has opened or escalated investigations into a list of individuals who share one thing in common: they crossed Trump.
Adam Schiff, who led impeachment proceedings against Trump, is being investigated by the DOJ for alleged insurance fraud. Attorney General Pam Bondi named a special prosecutor to the case. New York Attorney General Letitia James, who sued the Trump Organization and won, is facing a DOJ investigation into her personal mortgage applications. A grand jury has already issued subpoenas.
James Comey, who initiated the Russia investigation, has been investigated by the FBI. Former CIA Director John Brennan, who clashed publicly with Trump over Russian election interference, is under investigation for alleged false statements to Congress. Six Democratic members of Congress who advised service members not to follow illegal orders were referred for indictment. The grand jury declined to indict them.
Protect Democracy, a nonpartisan legal organization, has been tracking what it calls retaliatory use of arrests, prosecutions, and investigations by the Trump administration. The Carroll probe is the latest entry on a list that keeps growing.
What This Is
There is a legal term for using government power to punish people for exercising their rights. It is called retaliation. Courts have found it unconstitutional in employment cases, in housing cases, in civil rights cases. The question being asked by legal scholars and Democratic lawmakers is whether what is happening at the DOJ meets that definition at a federal level.
The practical effect is not hard to see. If you sue the president and win, the president’s Justice Department may investigate you. If you voted to impeach him, you may face a special prosecutor. If you enforced the law against him as a state attorney general, your mortgage applications may end up in front of a federal grand jury.
The International Bar Association and multiple former DOJ officials have raised concerns about the independence of the department under the current administration. The DOJ has not commented publicly on the Carroll investigation beyond confirming it exists.
A jury of twelve Americans found Donald Trump liable for sexually abusing E. Jean Carroll. Another jury found he defamed her when he said she was lying. The woman who told the truth in federal court is now the subject of a criminal investigation by the man she beat. That is where things stand.
Sources: CNN, NBC News, Washington Post, Axios, Protect Democracy, Democracy Docket, International Bar Association, PBS NewsHour, ABC News