AOC Faces Backlash Over Social Media Post Labeling Trump a “Rapist”

New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is facing mounting criticism and possible legal consequences following a controversial social media post in which she referred to former President Donald Trump as a “rapist.” The comment, shared on the platform X (formerly Twitter), has sparked a wave of public and legal commentary, with many alleging that her language crosses the line into potential defamation.

The post read: “Wow who would have thought that electing a rapist would have complicated the release of the Epstein Files.” The statement appeared to connect Trump to delays in the public release of records related to the late financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Ocasio-Cortez’s remark drew immediate attention, particularly because of its direct and unqualified nature. Many users on social media quickly responded by pointing out that although Trump was found liable for sexual assault in a civil case brought by writer E. Jean Carroll, he was not found guilty of rape. The distinction is a crucial one in legal terms.

The case in question, brought by Carroll, alleged that Trump assaulted her in a department store dressing room in the 1990s. A federal jury ultimately ruled that Trump was liable for sexual abuse and defamation but stopped short of finding him liable for rape, as defined under New York law.

Despite that legal nuance, Ocasio-Cortez’s post appeared to present the allegation as fact. Legal experts and political figures swiftly responded, warning that her statement could be interpreted as defamatory.

Utah Senator Mike Lee, a Republican, weighed in by referencing New York Times v. Sullivan, the landmark 1964 Supreme Court decision that established the high standard for public figures to prove defamation. According to the precedent, public figures must demonstrate that a false statement was made with “actual malice”—meaning it was made either knowingly false or with reckless disregard for the truth.

“Even under the ridiculously lenient standards of NY Times v. Sullivan, you’ve managed to incur defamation liability. Wow,” Lee commented in response to the congresswoman’s tweet.

Other users echoed the concern, noting that public accusations of criminal conduct—particularly something as serious as rape—without a conviction can carry legal risks. “As a sitting member of Congress with a large following, this statement is reckless and potentially libelous,” one user wrote.

Some users pointed out recent legal cases involving similar comments. In one high-profile example, Trump filed a defamation suit against ABC News and anchor George Stephanopoulos. During an interview, Stephanopoulos had stated that Trump had been “found liable for rape,” a claim that, while related to the E. Jean Carroll case, was inaccurate. That case reportedly ended with ABC and Stephanopoulos settling for a substantial amount, including millions paid to Trump’s presidential library foundation and legal fees, along with a formal apology.

Trump supporters quickly seized on the comparison between Ocasio-Cortez’s statement and the Stephanopoulos incident. “This is defamatory,” conservative commentator Laura Loomer said. “I hope Trump sues her the same way he sued Stephanopoulos—and wins.” Legal analyst Phil Holloway added, “This crosses a clear line. She’s not just voicing an opinion—she’s stating a false claim as fact.”

Some critics also accused Ocasio-Cortez of using the post to stir controversy for political gain. “She’s trying to raise her profile, but this is going too far,” Holloway added. Others responded with personal attacks, including Trump campaign communications director Steven Cheung, who issued a harsh statement criticizing the congresswoman’s motives and character.

As of Tuesday, Ocasio-Cortez had not responded to the criticism or issued a clarification. Her office remained silent amid growing calls for her to retract the statement or face legal repercussions.

Whether or not Trump or his legal team decides to pursue defamation action remains to be seen, but the controversy has reignited a debate over the boundaries of political speech, especially in the age of social media. For public officials, whose words can carry significant weight, the episode serves as a reminder of the legal and ethical responsibility to speak with accuracy—particularly when addressing matters as sensitive and serious as criminal allegations.

This incident also reflects the ongoing tensions in American politics, where lines between personal attacks, legal consequences, and public discourse continue to blur. As the 2024 election cycle ramps up, it’s likely that more such high-profile confrontations will emerge—and the courts may ultimately have the final word.