Hillary Clinton received unwelcome news in President Donald Trump’s long-running legal battle over the Russia-collusion narrative after Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas granted Trump more time to seek review of his case. The extension gives Trump and his fellow petitioners until October 9th to file a petition for a writ of certiorari. Trump is asking the nation’s highest court to revisit the dismissal of his civil racketeering lawsuit against Clinton, the Democratic National Committee, and numerous other defendants. The Supreme Court has not yet agreed to hear the case.
The dispute reaches back to Trump’s March 2022 lawsuit, which accused Clinton and her political allies of conspiring to spread false claims that Trump and his 2016 presidential campaign colluded with Russia. The complaint named the DNC, Perkins Coie, Fusion GPS, former FBI Director James Comey, and several other individuals and organizations alongside Clinton. Trump alleged that the defendants worked to “weave a false narrative” designed to “discredit, delegitimize and defame” him. He said the alleged conduct caused millions of dollars in legal expenses and lost business opportunities.
A federal district court dismissed the amended complaint, and the judge later imposed sanctions against Trump and several of his attorneys. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit largely upheld those rulings in November 2025, finding Trump’s remaining claims untimely and otherwise legally deficient. The appellate court also upheld sanctions totaling more than $1 million. Trump and his legal team then sought a rehearing, but the Eleventh Circuit denied that request on May 12th, setting the stage for a possible Supreme Court petition.
As Yahoo News reported, Trump’s lawyers asked for a second 30-day extension as they prepared to challenge the Eleventh Circuit’s decision. Justice Thomas, who handles applications arising from the Eleventh Circuit, had previously moved the deadline from August 10th to September 9th. The second request sought an October 9th deadline and cited the president’s official responsibilities, the complexity of the record, and other deadlines confronting his attorneys. Thomas granted that request on August 27th.
The Supreme Court’s official docket lists Trump, Alina Habba, Michael Madaio, and their associated law firms among the applicants. Clinton, the DNC, Perkins Coie, John Podesta, Fusion GPS, and others are listed as respondents. The extension order is procedural and does not indicate that the justices have decided to take the case. Trump’s team must first file its petition, after which at least four justices would have to vote to grant review.
In their application, Trump’s attorneys argued that the lower courts made “a series of fundamental legal errors” when they dismissed his civil RICO and injurious-falsehood claims and imposed what the filing called “extreme sanctions.” They said the forthcoming petition will ask whether the limitations period for a president’s private civil claim should be paused while the relevant alleged misconduct is under investigation or prosecution by executive-branch agencies. The lawyers also plan to argue that tolling provisions in the Clayton Act can apply to related civil RICO claims.
The Eleventh Circuit rejected those positions below, concluding that Trump knew of his alleged injury by October 2017 but did not sue until March 2022, five months after the four-year limitations period expired. The panel nevertheless acknowledged findings from Special Counsel John Durham’s investigation, including that key Steele dossier allegations were never corroborated, some appeared fabricated, and Crossfire Hurricane began without “any actual evidence of collusion.” The judges concluded that those findings did not repair the legal defects they saw in Trump’s racketeering claims.
"*" indicates required fields
Trump’s lawyers said more time was needed because of “the press of urgent business” facing the president, counsel’s competing court deadlines, and the need to confer with multiple petitioners. Granting the extension, they argued, would help them prepare “a clear, concise, and comprehensive petition for certiorari” while reducing disruption to Trump’s work as chief executive. The application closed with a prediction about the next step: “The forthcoming petition is likely to be granted in light of, among other things, the need to address the important issues discussed above.”