A New York court has ruled that sexual assault claims against Jason Miller, a former aide to Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, can move forward. The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York made this decision on September 17, 2026. The ruling is significant for victims of sexual violence, as it affirms their right to seek justice in the state where the alleged incidents occurred.
The court's ruling affects Arlene J. Delgado, who has accused Miller of multiple instances of sexual assault and battery, as well as intentional infliction of emotional distress. The decision allows Delgado to continue her legal battle against Miller, emphasizing the importance of jurisdiction in cases of sexual violence.
The dispute began when Delgado filed a lawsuit against Miller and the Trump campaign in New York, alleging that Miller committed tortious acts within the state. The case was initially heard in the Supreme Court of New York County, where Judge Lyle E. Frank denied Miller's motion to dismiss the claims. Miller then appealed the decision, leading to the ruling by the Appellate Division.
The main parties in this case are Arlene J. Delgado, the plaintiff, and Jason Miller, the defendant. Delgado alleges that Miller committed sexual assault and battery against her, as well as causing her emotional distress. The case has drawn attention due to its connection to high-profile political figures and the ongoing discussions surrounding sexual violence and accountability.
The Appellate Division, consisting of Judges Manzanet-Daniels, Kennedy, Mendez, Michael, and Hagler, ruled on several key points. The court upheld the lower court's finding of personal jurisdiction over Miller, stating, "New York's long-arm statute empowers courts to exercise specific personal jurisdiction over any non-domiciliary who... commits a tortious act within the state." This means that because Miller allegedly committed acts in New York, he can be held accountable there.
The court also addressed the claims of intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED). It found that Delgado's allegations of repeated violent assaults were sufficient to survive dismissal. The court noted that each incident of alleged assault is independently actionable, stating, "Each occasion giving rise to plaintiff's IIED claims has its own date of accrual." This ruling allows Delgado to pursue her claims for emotional distress stemming from these incidents.
However, the court did modify the previous ruling by dismissing the IIED claim related to acts that occurred in Nevada, citing the state's two-year statute of limitations. The court emphasized that the claims based on incidents in New York are timely under the Adult Survivor Act, which allows victims to file claims after the typical statute of limitations has expired.
This ruling is important for several reasons. First, it reinforces the legal principle that victims of sexual violence can seek justice in the jurisdiction where the alleged acts occurred. It also highlights the court's willingness to allow claims of emotional distress to proceed when they are based on multiple incidents of violence. This could encourage other victims to come forward and seek legal recourse.
The ruling may also have implications for other cases involving allegations of sexual violence, particularly those involving high-profile individuals. It signals that courts may be more receptive to claims that involve multiple incidents of abuse, rather than viewing them as a single, continuous act.
Moving forward, the case is likely to continue to unfold in the New York courts. Miller has the option to appeal the ruling further, although details about any potential appeal were not available in the court filing. The outcome of this case could set a precedent for how similar cases are handled in the future, particularly in relation to jurisdiction and the treatment of emotional distress claims.
As the legal process continues, both parties may prepare for a trial where the allegations will be examined in greater detail. The case not only impacts the individuals involved but also resonates with broader societal issues regarding accountability for sexual violence and the rights of victims.