The Justice Department has opened a criminal investigation into E. Jean Carroll, the longtime magazine columnist who accused President Trump and later won massive civil judgments against him. The focus, according to CNN, is whether Carroll committed perjury in testimony connected to her lawsuits. At the center is a 2022 deposition statement about who was funding her legal fight. The Justice Department has launched a criminal investigation into E. Jean Carroll, who accused Trump of sexual assault, according to sources https://t.co/02wWEO1bXq pic.twitter.com/Va0IXG16wj — CNN (@CNN) May 27, 2026 The issue is simple enough for normal people to understand. Carroll said under oath that no outside party was paying for her lawsuit. It later came out that billionaire Democrat donor Reid Hoffman had covered some legal fees and expenses. CNN details the investigation and the funding dispute now under federal review: The Justice Department investigation is focused on whether Carroll committed perjury in testimony tied to her two civil lawsuits against President Trump. Prosecutors are looking at a 2022 deposition in which Carroll said she had received no outside funding for her lawsuit, even though it was later revealed that Reid Hoffman had paid some legal fees and expenses. Senior Justice Department officials referred the matter to federal prosecutors in Chicago, according to the report. Carroll’s deposition occurred in New York, but one person connected to the funding issue, Hoffman, has a nonprofit based in Chicago. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche is recused from the matter because he previously worked as one of Trump’s personal attorneys on Carroll appeals. CNN also noted that Alina Habba argued at the time that Carroll’s team had concealed the funding issue. Judge Lewis Kaplan allowed another deposition but kept the Hoffman funding question away from the trial jury. That means the funding issue existed before trial, but jurors never heard the full fight over it. That is the legal problem now sitting in front of prosecutors. It does not mean Carroll has been charged. It means DOJ is investigating whether the funding answer she gave under oath crossed a criminal line. Exclusive: Justice Department launched a criminal investigation into Trump accuser E. Jean Carroll. Acting AG Todd Blanche, who represented Trump, is recused from the case. W/@PaulaReidCNN and @KaraScannell https://t.co/mY1Q7lrT9e — Hannah Rabinowitz (@HBRabinowitz) May 27, 2026 The timing is also important because Carroll’s cases against President Trump are still active on appeal. Her side won huge civil awards, but Trump continues to fight the judgments and has repeatedly called the claims a politically driven hoax. AP recently summarized where the $83 million defamation judgment stands: President Trump does not have to pay the $83 million defamation award to Carroll while the U.S. Supreme Court has a chance to review the case or reject the appeal. The Second Circuit allowed the delay, while requiring Trump to post a $7.4 million bond to cover additional interest costs during the process. The appeals court had already refused to hold a rare full-court rehearing after a three-judge panel affirmed the January 2024 verdict. Trump’s legal team then asked for the award to remain paused while the case moves toward the high court. The broader Carroll litigation includes the earlier May 2023 verdict, when a jury awarded Carroll $5 million after concluding Trump sexually abused her and later defamed her. Trump has denied the allegation, called the claims a “made up scam,” and is still pursuing appellate relief in the long-running fight. The pause on payment keeps the judgment from being collected while the Supreme Court stage plays out. That appeal context makes the new DOJ investigation even more significant because the Carroll litigation remains active, expensive, and politically explosive. For years, the Carroll case was treated by the media as a one-way weapon against Trump. Now the question is whether the funding trail and sworn testimony around that case deserve scrutiny too. If prosecutors find nothing, the matter ends there. If they find that Carroll’s sworn answer was false in a way that matters legally, one of the most celebrated anti-Trump lawsuits in America could become a very different story. This is a Guest Post from our friends over at WLTReport. View the original article here.