Two women who have accused Donald Trump of sexual assault may testify in the upcoming courtroom battle over his alleged rape of writer E. Jean Carroll, as a recent decision by a federal judge could potentially expose previous misconduct by the former president.

Trump has vehemently denied Carroll’s allegations of raping her in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room in the mid-1990s, insisting that he never met Carroll, despite photographic evidence that they interacted socially. The accused has also claimed that she is part of a Democratic conspiracy to undermine his presidency.

However, the federal judge in the case recently ruled that Trump’s derogatory statements about women on the Access Hollywood tape could be admitted at trial, citing them as evidence that the former president has a history of sexually predatory conduct.

The Access Hollywood tape refers to a recording made in 2005 of an off-camera conversation between Trump and television host Billy Bush, in which Trump boasted about groping women and getting away with sexual assault due to his celebrity status. The tape was widely circulated in 2016, causing a scandal during the presidential campaign.

This decision by the judge has given hope to two other women, who have accused Trump of sexual assault but have not previously testified in court or publicly discussed their claims. The women, identified as Jane Doe and Lisa Doe in court filings, allege that Trump raped them in the early 2000s.

Jane Doe claims that Trump assaulted her at a party, where she was an underage victim. Meanwhile, Lisa Doe alleges that Trump sexually assaulted her in 2006 at a hotel by threatening to ruin her career if she spoke out. The two women have filed a joint motion to intervene in the Carroll case, seeking to testify on their own allegations.

The judge’s decision to admit the Access Hollywood tape as evidence is significant because it could potentially establish a pattern of behavior by Trump. Carroll’s legal team has argued that the tape shows that Trump has a “propensity for engaging in similar uncharged sexual assaultive conduct,” which could support her claim that he raped her.

The inclusion of the two additional accusers, if allowed, could further support Carroll’s case by presenting a preponderance of evidence about Trump’s conduct towards women. Their testimony could also boost their own claims against the former president.

Trump’s legal team is still trying to fight the admission of the Access Hollywood tape, arguing that it is irrelevant to the case since it does not mention Carroll or the specific incident in question. The former president also filed a motion to dismiss the case altogether, claiming that he cannot be sued for actions he took during his presidency.

But the judge, Lewis A. Kaplan, has denied Trump’s motion to dismiss, ruling that he cannot escape accountability for his alleged misconduct. The judge wrote in a ruling, “There is not a single word in the Constitution or federal law that supports” Trump’s argument that he is immune from such lawsuits.

Kaplan also noted that the Carroll case raises important questions about the scope of presidential immunity, particularly when it comes to alleged misconduct that occurred before Trump became president. Trump’s legal team is expected to appeal the decision.

The case has become a high-profile showdown between Trump and his accusers, with Carroll insisting that she will not back down from her allegations. She has also expressed her support for the other women who have accused Trump, saying that they share a “shameful bond” and that she believes their claims are credible.

The inclusion of the other accusers in the case could potentially add more layers of complexity and controversy to an already divisive legal battle. But it could also bring some measure of justice for the women who have accused Trump of sexual assault and have struggled to have their voices heard.

As the legal battle continues, the eyes of the country are once again on Trump and his alleged misconduct, with many wondering if justice will ultimately be served. The inclusion of the Access Hollywood tape and the potential testimony of two additional accusers could be crucial in determining the outcome of this case, and possibly even shaping the future of presidential immunity in the United States.