KXIP vs KKR Live Score

Summer Zervos filed the suit previous year after Trump said publicly that she and other women making similar claims made them up.

The ruling to push forward with Zervos' case "is an important victory", Nita Chaudhary, co-founder of UltraViolet, an organization fighting sexism, said in a statement. On Tuesday, Judge Jennifer Schecter sided with Zervos.

"Nothing in the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution even suggests that the President can not be called to account before a state court for wrongful conduct that bears no relationship to any federal executive responsibility", she wrote.

A court document provided to The Post on Tuesday by Michael Avenatti, an attorney for Daniels, describes the polygraph examination, which concluded that Daniels was being "truthful" about her allegations of a sexual encounter with Trump.

McDougal sued American Media Inc., the company that owns the National Enquirer, which allegedly paid her $150,000 not to speak about her affair. A much-anticipated interview with Daniels is scheduled to air Sunday (Monday NZT) on CBS's "60 Minutes".

Zervos, a former contestant on the NBC show, has accused Trump of sexually assaulting her in 2007.

Trump's attorney Marc Kasowitz meanwhile announced plans to immediately appeal and seek a stay of the ruling.

More news: Whatsapp co-founder urges people to delete their Facebook account

Schecter said the president has no immunity and is subject to the laws for "purely private acts".

"It left open the question of whether concerns of federalism and comity compel a different conclusion for suits brought in state court".

"We are grateful for the opportunity to prove that that defendant falsely branded Ms. Zervos a phoney for telling the truth about his unwanted sexual groping", she said in a statement. Her lawsuit seeks an apology and at least $2,914.

In allowing Zervos' case to go forward, Schecter cited a 1997 US Supreme Court precedent allowing former Arkansas state employee Paula Jones to pursue a sexual harassment case against then-president Bill Clinton to proceed. But the nation's highest court explicitly stated that it wasn't deciding if lawsuits in state court could proceed against a president.

But Schecter said that Trump's statements could be proven true or false and that, because his statements were delivered on Twitter-a "preferred means of communication often used by defendant", the judge noted-and in speeches, the statements cannot be characterized simply as heated rhetoric or hyperbole.

Trump's lawyers responded that the suit has no standing in state courts while their client is in office, and that the matter should be dismissed or stayed until Trump is no longer president.