Politics

As President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump are poised to secure their party’s nomination and gear up to face off in another general election campaign, Americans are split on who they trust to do a better job leading the country, according to a new ABC News/Ipsos poll.

According to the poll, conducted using Ipsos’ Knowledge Panel, 36% of Americans trust Trump to do a better job leading the country as president, while 33% trust Biden and 30% trust neither.

More Republicans trust Trump to do a better job leading the country (82%) than Democrats trust Biden (72%). Among independents, 32% trust Biden, 31% trust Trump and 37% trust neither.

The candidates’ favorability ratings are similar, and similarly low, with 33% of Americans having a favorable impression of Biden compared to 29% for Trump. Just over one in five Americans (21%) have an unfavorable view of both the current and former president. Whether this group votes and who they vote for will be a key driver of the 2024 outcome.

Among those who view both candidates unfavorably, an overwhelming majority — 72% — trust neither candidate to do a better job leading the country while only 19% trust Trump to do a better job leading the country and even fewer — 9% — trust Biden.

Biden made the case for his second term during his third State of the Union address on Thursday, delivering a fiery speech that touted his record.

His forceful speech appears to have been well-received — 29% of Americans found it to be better than they expected, according to the poll, while 12% found it worse than expected and 24% the same as they expected. Another 35% of Americans did not read, see or hear about the address. Of those who reported reading, seeing, or hearing something about the speech, 44% found it to be better than they expected and 18% said it was worse than expected.

Among the key target group of “double haters” (those with unfavorable views of both men), half said they did not read, see or hear anything about the speech while 19% thought the president did better than expected and 7% thought he did worse than expected.

When it comes to the job Biden is doing on major issues and how Trump handled these same issues when he was president, Americans grade Trump more favorably than Biden on the economy (49%-37%), inflation (45%-31%), crime (41%-35%) as well as on immigration and the situation at the U.S.-Mexico border (45%-29%).

Americans give higher marks to Biden over Trump on climate change (42%-33%) and abortion (47%-35%). Among Americans who view both candidates unfavorably, 36% approve of Biden’s handling of abortion.

Americans who view both candidates unfavorably are less likely to approve of Biden’s handling of the economy (15%), inflation (12%), crime (16%) and immigration (7%).

Americans’ approval of how the president is handling the war between Israel and Hamas has gotten worse — decreasing from 41% in October to 30% in the latest poll.

Among Americans overall, Biden’s ratings on abortion have improved by eight points, up from 39% approval in October to 47% now. Biden highlighted abortion policy in his State of the Union address. Whether voters find abortion to be a crucial issue compared to the economy, inflation and immigration and the situation at the border where Trump does better will be a key determinant of the 2024 presidential election.

METHODOLOGY – This ABC News/Ipsos poll was conducted using the probability-based Ipsos KnowledgePanel® March 8-9, 2024, in English and Spanish, among a random national sample of 536 U.S. adults. Results have a margin of sampling error of 4.5 points, including the design effect, for the full sample. Sampling error is not the only source of differences in polls. Partisan divisions are 25-25-41 percent, Democrats-Republicans-independents. See the poll’s topline results and details on the methodology here.

ABC News’ Dan Merkle and Ken Goldstein contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — No Labels may finally have a candidate in consideration for its third-party “unity ticket” in the 2024 presidential election.

Sources familiar with the group’s efforts to field a third-party ticket tell ABC News that No Labels representatives have had meetings with former Georgia GOP Lt. Gov. Geoff Duncan about running as the group’s presidential candidate.

Duncan wouldn’t comment on this report, but isn’t shutting down speculation.

On Friday, No Labels voted to move forward with the effort to field a bi-partisan challenge to the presumptive Democratic and Republican nominees President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump.

According to the sources, Duncan has meet with the No Labels leadership and this weekend will be meeting with Republican donors in a series of meetings set up by No Labels.

Duncan served as Georgia’s lieutenant governor from 2019 to 2023. While he is a conservative Republican, he has been sharply critical of Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election.

Last month, Duncan wrote an op-ed in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution explaining why he would not support Trump for president. “So now the uncomfortable part: admitting to your neighbors the ends don’t justify the means any longer,” he wrote.

“Trump has become incapable of leading in a respectable or mature way. Until more of us are willing to acknowledge that hard truth, we will be on the outside looking in.”

No Labels Chief Strategist Ryan Clancy said, “Now that No Labels’ delegates have given the go ahead for us to accelerate our candidate search for a Unity ticket, voters will read plenty of speculation about who would be on it.”

He continued, “But No Labels has not yet chosen a ticket and any names floating around are being put out there by someone else.”

No Labels will announce a formal selection process next Thursday, March 14.

Several potential candidates such as Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley, Sen. Joe Manchin and Gov. Larry Hogan were once in consideration, but have since distanced themselves in recent weeks going their separate ways.

In response to previous names floated, Clancy said on ABC News Live, “The one thing I would tell people is for months there have been names floated out there associated with the No Labels ticket. The only problem is none of those names have been put out there by us. So if you’re reading any names today, or over the weekend, none of those names are out there because no labels, put them out there. Those names are out there because you know people like to do baseless speculation.”

ABC News’ Kelsey Walsh contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — In an election year when polls show voters don’t approve of either President Joe Biden or former President Donald Trump, third party and independent options are attracting notice from some.

“I do think that these conditions with two candidates who are not well-liked running — that you do have a greater opportunity for there to be a higher third-party vote share this time around,” said Geoffrey Skelley, a senior elections analyst at 538.

Third parties have played a significant role in some past races, including in 2016, when then-Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton lost key swing states by fewer votes than third-party candidates netted, and in 1992, with independent Ross Perot.

This year, some candidates, like Cornel West, are running to Biden’s left, arguing he isn’t as progressive as the base Democratic voter.

Democrat-turned-independent Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., on the other hand, is running on an anti-establishment platform that’s more difficult to peg on the ideological spectrum — one that includes a vociferous push to tackle climate change while also promoting conspiracy theories about COVID-19 and skepticism of vaccines that could resonate with hard-liners on the far right and far left.

“I feel that the Democratic Party’s really moved away from representing any values that I have,” said Oliver Shampine, who referenced Biden’s handling of Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza and noted that West speaks more about the need for peace and treatment of Palestinians.

“Both candidates have had their chance, they’ve had their four years in the White House, and I haven’t seen a difference that I would like to see,” added Maddie Garvia. “I’m very, I’m very sure that Kennedy will provide great results for every American.”

Looming over the election is also No Labels, an outside group that is considering running a “unity ticket” of a Republican and a Democrat, though it’s still unclear precisely who they’d want to team up for a presidential run. They’ve set a deadline of Friday to make their decision.

The group is banking on wide enough frustration with a likely Biden-Trump rematch to open a lane for it to launch its own ticket — with early polling and interviews suggesting that frustration could come to a boil among parts of the electorate.

“I want to see us have somebody that is willing to work with the other side, gain respect, show respect, collaborate, solve, bring us together — not be throwing mud pies at each other,” said Louise Short. “Biden and Trump are throwing salvos they’re not saying what they stand for.”

In the end, it’s extremely unlikely that any third-party candidate will win the presidential election this year, given how many voters typically choose Democrats or Republicans and logistical challenges like name recognition and ballot access, experts say.

But if a candidate ends up pulling enough votes in key states from either Biden or Trump, they could serve as a decider for the entire country.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden disappointed some Democrats and immigration activists when he used the term “illegal” at the State of the Union when referring to an undocumented migrant accused of killing 22-year-old nursing student Laken Riley.

Now, the administration and his campaign are weighing in on the off-script moment.

White House communications director Ben LaBolt told ABC News White House Correspondent Karen Travers that when Biden said that, he was reacting to language from an interjecting lawmaker.

“In terms of that particular moment, he was responding to language that was used in the House chamber,” LaBolt said when asked whether Biden regretted using that term, considered an offensive and outdated way of referring to undocumented immigrants.

“He wanted to speak directly to the parents of Laken Riley, as somebody who lost a child and speaks and thinks about that on a continual basis and knows what they went through,” LaBolt added.

“And you heard him talk more broadly about how he thinks about immigrants in this country,” he continued. “The fact that he wouldn’t use language like Donald Trump has used, calling them vermin, poisoning the blood of our country, really lifting them up and he respects them as human beings. But also as somebody who supports a bipartisan solution to what’s happening at the border.”

Biden, too, was asked if he regretted using that language as he was on his way to a campaign event in Philadelphia on Friday afternoon.

“Well, I probably shouldn’t — I don’t re– technically he’s not supposed to be here,” Biden told the reporter, stopping and starting throughout his answer.

The moment under scrutiny came about halfway through Thursday’s address as he turned to talking about immigration and criticizing Republicans for tanking a bipartisan border deal.

Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia — a vocal Biden critic — called out from the audience: “What about Laken Riley?”

A back-and-forth between them ensued.

“Laken Riley, an innocent young woman who was killed,” Biden started before Greene yelled out, “By an illegal.”

“By an illegal. That’s right,” Biden repeated before expressing his condolences to her family: “To her parents, I say, my heart goes out to you.”

The National Immigration Center said it was “shocked” to hear Biden use that term. Rep. Chuy García, D-Ill., said as an immigrant he was “extremely disappointed” to hear it, a sentiment echoed by some other Democratic lawmakers.

LaBolt said he was not aware of any outreach by President Biden or senior White House aides to Democratic lawmakers who have been publicly critical of him for using that term.

Vice President Kamala Harris when asked by ABC News Chief White House Correspondent Mary Bruce if she was comfortable with the language attributed it to a “chaotic” scene, but said Biden was still able to empathize with Riley’s family and make his broader pitch on the need to fix the immigration system.

Biden campaign co-chair Mitch Landrieu told CNN earlier Friday Biden “probably should’ve used a different word” and called it a “small mistake.”

Campaign aides, in a testy response to the stir caused by Biden’s use of the term “illegal,” also sought to stress how different his view on immigration is compared to that of many in the Republican Party, including his rival Donald Trump.

“Oh, yeah, look, I know it may have been difficult to hear over the incessant heckling of Marjorie Taylor Greene last night, but we should be very clear about what the president was saying when it comes to fixing our broken system and in rejecting the cruelty in the equal extremism, it’s been pushed by people like Donald Trump and Marjorie Taylor Greene, who are actually just trying to demonize immigrants in an attempt to score political points,” Michael Tyler, the campaign’s communications director, told a reporter who asked if Biden’s remark could hurt his outreach to Latinos.

Tyler accused Trump and Greene of “using immigrants as their primary political punching ban.”

ABC News’ Molly Nagle, Libby Cathey and Gabrielle Abdul-Hakim contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(PHILADELPHIA) — President Joe Biden is heading to battleground Pennsylvania on Friday afternoon to build off his momentum from the State of the Union, kicking off a major ramp-up in his reelection campaign.

Biden is being joined by the first lady as he delivers remarks in the outskirts of Philadelphia — the first test as to whether he can keep up the energy and forceful rhetoric that he showed in Thursday night’s high-stakes speech.

Biden used the stage, one of his biggest before the November election, to confront Republicans and his 2024 rival while laying out his own accomplishments and what else he wants to get done while in office (and if given another four years).

While the president didn’t say “Donald Trump,” he mentioned his “predecessor” more than a dozen times. He accused Trump of bowing to Russian President Vladimir Putin, trying to bury the truth of what happened on Jan. 6 and tanking a bipartisan immigration bill.

Biden will continue to tear into Trump during his speech on Friday afternoon and lay out the different visions they have for America’s future.

The Biden campaign told ABC News they chose Pennsylvania’s Delaware County for Friday’s event to reach suburban voters in a critical swing state. Trump has underperformed in the suburbs, and Biden’s team is hoping they can pick up supporters there that backed Nikki Haley in the Republican primary over the former president.

This is just one of several visits the President will be making to battleground states in the coming weeks. Over the weekend Biden will hold an event in Georgia, and next week he’ll campaign in Wisconsin and Michigan.

The travel is part of a significant build-up in campaign operations. The campaign also announced a $30 million advertising blitz and the scaling up of state-level operations, hiring hundreds of news staff, and increasing volunteer opportunities.

Jen O’Malley Dillon, the campaign’s chair, said this new phase will prepare them for a Trump rematch. The former president is all but certain to be the Republican nominee after cruising through Super Tuesday, prompting the last major GOP rival to exit the race.

“I think that really just showcases the strength that we are really positioned for this perfect moment in time, this inflection point, headed into the general election versus Trump,” O’Malley Dillion said of the new initiatives. “Trump’s bleeding cash, he’s really behind in building the infrastructure that you’d expect to be seeing of a former president.”

Biden’s fiery performance on Thursday night quelled anxieties among Democrats about his stamina and fitness, but he’ll have to keep it up over these next eight months. Polling has consistently shown his age (81) is a top concern for voters.

Addressing his age in Thursday’s address, Biden sought to flip the script by attacking Trump, who is 77, as having outdated ideas that will move the country in the wrong direction — a line he’ll likely repeat on the campaign trail.

“My fellow Americans, the issue facing our nation isn’t how old we are, it’s how old our ideas are,” he said. “Hate, anger, revenge, retribution are among the oldest of ideas. But you can’t lead America with ancient ideas that only take us back.”

ABC News’ Alexandra Hutzler contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Embattled former Rep. George Santos, who was expelled from Congress in December, has announced that he’s once again running for the House — but, Republican leadership in the Long Island district he’s eyeing told ABC News on Friday that there is “no appetite” for Santos.

Santos announced on X that he would run again after joining his former colleagues in the House for President Joe Biden’s State of the Union address. Despite being ousted from the job, Santos maintains the ability to appear on the floor as any prior member does.

“After a lot of prayer and conversation with my friends and family, I have made a very important decision that will shake things up. Tonight, I want to announce that I will be returning to the arena of politics and challenging Nick for the battle over #NY1. I look forward to debating him on the issues and on his weak record as a Republican. The fight for our majority is imperative for the survival of the country,” Santos wrote Thursday.

A corresponding candidacy filing with the Federal Elections Commission was submitted Thursday as well. There are no rules prohibiting an ousted member of Congress from running again.

This time, Santos will challenge Republican Rep. Nick LaLota in New York’s 1st District, which neighbors the congressional district he previously represented, New York’s 3rd District.

The leader of the Suffolk County GOP, the arm of the Republican Party in the congressional district where Santos is running, told ABC News that the embattled congressman won’t be taken seriously.

“The people have no appetite for this bad comedy show to continue,” Suffolk County GOP Chairman Jesse Garcia said in a statement to ABC News.

“His candidacy and whatever petitions he might file will have the same level of credibility as the degree he said he claimed to have received from Baruch College,” Garcia said.

Garcia said LaLota is a better candidate for the district, he added.

“Nick LaLota is a common sense conservative and naval veteran who continues to fight for the hard-working families of Long Island,” Garcia said. “I’m confident the people of the First District will continue to overwhelmingly support him at the ballot box.”

In his announcement, Santos called LaLota an “empty suit.”

“New York hasn’t had a real conservative represent them since I left office arbitrarily, thanks to RINO, empty suits like @nicklalota. He is a [sic] willing to risk the future of our majority and the future of this country for his own political gain,” Santos wrote.

LaLota responded via X, quickly dismissing Santos’ credibility while vowing to take him on.

“To raise the standard in Congress, and to hold a pathological liar who stole an election accountable, I led the charge to expel George Santos. If finishing the job requires beating him in a primary, count me in,” LaLota said in a post on X Thursday night.

Part of the same freshman class of representatives as Santos, LaLota was one of the first Republicans to call for a House Ethics Committee investigation into the embattled former congressman, which ultimately led to Santos’ historic expulsion from the chamber. Santos was the first House member to be expelled in more than 20 years.

Santos has pleaded not guilty to 23 federal charges. Before his ouster, he called the bipartisan report from the House Ethics Committee that alleged the New York congressman “placed his desire for private gain above his duty to uphold the Constitution, federal law, and ethical principles” a “politicized smear.”

Democrat Rep. Tom Suozzi recently won back the seat left vacant by Santos’ departure. Suozzi previously represented New York’s 1st District for three terms before stepping away to launch a failed bid for governor.

ABC News’ Nicolas Kerr contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Vice President Kamala Harris, in a post-State of the Union interview with ABC News Chief White House Correspondent Mary Bruce on Friday, praised President Joe Biden’s “passionate” performance but was noncommittal on whether he will debate rival Donald Trump.

“We’ll get to that at some point and we’ll deal with that. But the point is right now on this day after the State of the Union, I think the president laid down the facts for the American people in terms of what’s at stake and I thought he did an extraordinary job,” Harris said.

As questions about Biden’s age and stamina continue to be a concern for most Americans, Republicans have framed the election as not only about Biden but also a potential President Harris.

“What do you say to voters who are sold on the president but may not be sold on you about this potential possibility?” Bruce asked the vice president.

“Well, first of all, I think what we saw in President Joe Biden is somebody who’s prepared to take on a second term, and do it with passion and do it with vigor,” she responded.

“And as it relates to, you know, the various tactics that our opponents are using, they’re going to attack a myriad of issues,” she continued. “But here’s the bottom line, if necessary, which will not be the case, I am ready. But the bottom line is our president is full of vigor and passion and perspective to take on another term. And I’m standing right with him.”

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — U.S. job gains far exceeded expectations in February, a defiant show of strength that keeps the economy humming but signals a cooldown from the breakneck start to 2024, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data on Friday showed.

The economy added 275,000 jobs last month, blowing past economist expectations of about 200,000 jobs added but marking a substantial decline from the hiring of roughly 350,000 workers in January, BLS data showed.

The unemployment rate climbed to 3.9% in February, rising from 3.7% in the month prior, according to the data.

While the job market remains hot, its easing temperature could allow the Federal Reserve to go forward with interest rate cuts expected in the coming months, some analysts told ABC News on Friday.

In other words, the fresh jobs report aligns with the central bank’s path toward a soft landing, in which inflation returns to normal levels while the economy averts a recession, they said.

A solid job market exemplifies the continued strength of the U.S. economy, since profits driven by strong demand lead to growth and additional hiring. However, excess demand risks driving up prices and rekindling inflation.

“For those worried about signs of unwelcome heat in the market after the past few months, this report is a welcome cooling breeze. And if you’re concerned about a labor market on unsteady ground, you shouldn’t be too frightened,” Nick Bunker, economic research director for North America at Indeed Hiring Lab, told ABC News in a statement.

Inflation has fallen significantly from a peak of 9.1% but it remains roughly a percentage point higher than the Fed’s target rate of 2%.

While job growth remains robust, the performance last month keeps the central bank on track for interest rate cuts this year, Mark Hamrick, senior economic analyst at Bankrate, told ABC News in a statement.

The Fed “isn’t in a hurry to cut rates, but it is setting the stage,” Hamrick said.

When weighing an interest rate cut, the Fed closely watches wage growth, since a rise in worker pay could prompt businesses to offset the added costs by raising prices.

Wages climbed 4.3% in February compared to a year ago, the BLS data on Friday showed. That rate exceeds the inflation rate of 3.1%, effectively giving the typical worker a pay bump.

However, the wage growth falls short of expectations, putting the central bank on track to achieve its goal of moderate inflation and continued economic expansion, Seema Shah, chief global strategist at Principal Asset Management, told ABC News in a statement.

“If the economy can continue to add jobs but without triggering a resurgence in wage growth, the Fed will achieve its soft landing,” Shah said.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — After flirting with a third-party presidential bid over the past year, No Labels is set to hold a meeting Friday where its members intend to make a decision on whether the movement will enter the 2024 presidential election.

The meeting will be held virtually on Friday and will include all 800 delegates from 50 states to deliberate if a “unity ticket” — consisting of one Republican and one Democrat — is a viable option. The meeting is just the first phase of a longer process, and at the end of the meeting No Labels will not name its presidential and vice presidential picks, according to sources familiar with the meeting details.

Super Tuesday set up the inevitable rematch No Labels foreshadowed for months. Previously, the bipartisan group indicated that they would enter the 2024 election following Super Tuesday if the presumptive nominees are President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump. According to several supporters including No Labels state co-chairs who plan to join the call, they believe Americans want a different option.

It’s not likely that Biden’s fiery State of the Union address on Thursday night changed their minds.

“Two thirds of voters don’t want a rematch of the 2020 election. I mean, they have different reasons for not wanting Biden or Trump to run, but most Americans badly want better choices,” No Labels Chief Strategist Ryan Clancy said in October.

There is a strong appetite to move forward with selecting a ticket as well, No Labels co-chairs and supporters said.

Nancy Jacobson, chief executive and founder of No Labels, published an op-ed in the Dallas Morning News last week suggesting an independent ticket could win in 2024.

“A once-in-a-generation opportunity exists for an extraordinary leader to rise up and guide our nation toward unity and healing,” Jacobson wrote.

She said she believes that finding that candidate is the last piece needed.

If the delegates decide to proceed, No Labels will enter a second phase of their process and spend the next few weeks finalizing the group’s candidate selection process. As a final step, No Labels will reconvene and present its candidate to the group for approval.

However, there is a chance No Labels could decide to scrap all plans. Some supporters indicated they are worried their decision on Friday could lead the group to spoil the 2024 election.

In conversations with ABC News, supporters repeated that they are “as anti-Trump as they come” and don’t view their efforts as helping the former president be reelected. No Labels supporters classify themselves as disenfranchised Republican voters or moderate independent voters.

No Labels leadership has reiterated claims that they will not spoil the 2024 election.

“We will never fuel a spoiler candidate,” No Labels Chief Strategist Ryan Clancy said. “We don’t want to fuel any sort of candidacy that’s pulling more votes from one side.”

“We at No Labels have been clear from the beginning that we will not introduce a spoiler into the race.

Jacobson said No Labels will “either give our ballot line to a ticket with a clear path to victory, or we’ll step aside.”

No Labels suggests that they have been talking to “exceptional leaders,” although that list of potential contenders has dwindled as Election Day nears.

In recent weeks, several donors threw their support behind former Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley — who exited the race earlier this week — and said they believed she was the unicorn candidate for the third-party run. However, No Labels put that to rest, releasing a statement after Haley’s campaign suspension saying they will take “at her word” that she “isn’t interested in pursuing another route to the presidency.”

Sen. Joe Manchin, a Democrat, once speculated to be a candidate on the ticket, said last month that he would not run for president.

“I wish them the best with whatever,” Manchin said during an “Americans Together” listening tour stop in Manchester, New Hampshire, in January.

Former Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan was also once speculated to be on the ticket, but announced last month that he would run for U.S. Senate instead.

Other names that have been floated by the bipartisan group include: former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear, Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy and New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu.

The group is on the ballot in 16 states — including three swing states: Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Maine, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota and Utah.

No Labels previously claimed that it would be on the ballot in 34 states by the end of 2023. Now, the group says it will attempt to get on the ballot in 33 states by the time a candidate is announced. The ticket would be responsible for the remainder of the states, its leaders said.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Former President Donald Trump has secured a $91,630,000 bond for the judgment in his defamation case brought by the writer E. Jean Carroll.

The former president obtained an appeals bond from the Federal Insurance Company totaling $91,630,000 to cover the $83 million judgment in the case plus interest, according to a court filing Friday morning.

“President Trump respectfully requests that this Court recognize the supersedeas bond obtained by President Trump in the sum of $91,630,000.00 and approve it as adequate and sufficient to stay the enforcement of the Judgment, to the extent that the Judgment awards damages, pending the ultimate disposition of President Trump’s appeal,” Trump attorney Alina Habba said in the filing.

Trump on Friday also filed a notice of appeal of the judgment to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Either paying the judgment or posting a bond for the judgment’s full amount was required for him to move ahead with the appeal.

In a statement to ABC News, Habba said they are confident that their appeal will result in the judgment being overturned.

“Due to the numerous prejudicial errors made at the lower level, we are highly confident that the Second Circuit will overturn this egregious judgment,” Habba said.

The former president in January was ordered to pay $83.3 million in damages to Carroll, a former Elle magazine columnist, for defaming her in 2019 when he denied her allegation that he sexually abused her in the dressing room of a Manhattan department store in the 1990s. Trump, who said Carroll was “totally lying” and that she was “not my type,” has denied all wrongdoing.

On Thursday, the judge overseeing the case denied Trump’s request for a temporary delay of the penalties.

“Mr. Trump’s current situation is a result of his own dilatory actions,” Judge Lewis Kaplan wrote in his order Thursday. “He has had since January 26 to organize his finances with the knowledge that he might need to bond this judgment, yet he waited until 25 days after the jury verdict … to file his prior motion for an unsecured or partially secured stay pending resolution of post-trial motions.”

Kaplan said that Trump failed to show how the judgment constitutes an “irreparable injury” or demonstrate the expenses he faces by posting a bond in the case.

“The expense of ongoing litigation in the absence of a stay does not constitute ‘irreparable injury’ in the relevant sense of that term,” Kaplan wrote.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.