But Trump's attorneys argue the case is about far more than the growing price tag. Calling the dispute unprecedented, the petition claims this is the first time in U.S. history that a court has imposed damages liability on a president for conduct they argue occurred while he was carrying out the duties of his office. The filing warns that allowing the judgment to stand could fundamentally alter the presidency by exposing future presidents to personal civil lawsuits over official communications made while serving in the White House. Rather than revisiting Carroll's allegations, the petition focuses on what Trump's lawyers describe as a constitutional question with nationwide implications: whether a president can be personally sued for statements made from the White House while responding to reporters about accusations bearing on his fitness for office.