The US Department of Justice has opened a criminal investigation tied to the lawsuits brought against President Donald Trump by E. Jean Carroll, with investigators reportedly examining nonprofit funding linked to billionaire Democratic donor and LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman.
The investigation is examining whether false statements were made under oath during Carroll’s civil lawsuits against Trump, which resulted in nearly $90 million in combined judgments against the president.
The investigation is already fueling fresh debate about whether federal law enforcement institutions are becoming increasingly entangled in political and personal legal battles surrounding Trump and his critics.
A source familiar with the probe told USA TODAY that the investigation is currently focused on the Hoffman-linked nonprofit rather than Carroll herself, although the source described the situation as fluid and ongoing.
The investigation is reportedly being handled by the US Attorney’s Office in Chicago. The Justice Department declined to comment on the existence of the probe, and no criminal charges have been filed.
The latest development comes as Trump continues trying to avoid paying the massive damages awarded in the civil cases. The Supreme Court is currently considering whether to hear at least one of Trump’s appeals after lower courts rejected multiple challenges tied to the verdicts.
Carroll accused Trump of sexually assaulting her inside a Manhattan department store decades ago. In separate civil trials, juries found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation, awarding Carroll millions in damages. Trump has repeatedly denied the allegations.
Reports surrounding the DOJ investigation have focused in part on testimony Carroll gave during the litigation regarding outside financial support connected to the lawsuits. Court filings later acknowledged that Hoffman-backed nonprofit funding had helped cover some legal expenses.
However, federal appeals judges previously rejected arguments from Trump’s legal team that Carroll intentionally lied under oath about the funding arrangements.
In a December 2024 ruling affirming one of the jury verdicts against Trump, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit said there was no evidence Carroll had been personally involved in arranging the outside funding or that she knowingly made false statements during testimony.
The Justice Department investigation is emerging alongside several others high-profile inquiries involving individuals who have publicly challenged or accused Trump. Critics argue the pattern risks undermining confidence in the political neutrality of federal law enforcement, while Trump supporters have framed the investigations as overdue accountability after years of legal battles surrounding the president.
Online reaction quickly became deeply divided, with thousands of comments across social media and news platforms reflecting growing distrust in major institutions, including the courts, the Justice Department and the broader political system itself.
The case now sits at the center of a wider national debate about political power, institutional independence and how aggressively federal authorities should pursue investigations tied to figures connected to presidential legal disputes.
