As they pushed for approval of the settlement, the plaintiffs’ lawyers said that the objection could cause delays in settlement checks being distributed or disrupt the deal by exposing Mr. Trump to individual lawsuits from former students like Ms. Simpson.

“What she is looking for is an apology, and you can’t get that,” Patrick Coughlin, another of the plaintiffs’ lawyers, said at a court hearing on Thursday.

Ms. Simpson’s lawyer, Gary Friedman, argued in court on Thursday that it was “not fair” for the case to reach “the point of settlement and say, ‘We’re not giving you the chance to opt out.’” When Judge Curiel reiterated during the hearing that a jury trial could lead to less favorable results, Mr. Friedman said, “That is a risk analysis that Sherri Simpson has the right to make.”

It is unclear if Ms. Simpson will appeal, and Mr. Friedman did not return messages seeking comment.

In a court filing last week, Mr. Trump’s lawyers asked the judge to give final approval to the settlement. Mr. Trump was motivated to agree to the sweeping deal because it would resolve the claims and avoid trial. His lawyers did not respond to request for comment.

Mr. Trump rebutted the fraud claims during his presidential bid, at one point questioning Judge Curiel’s impartiality based on his Mexican heritage. He pointed to positive reviews of the program and vowed to reopen the university after what he said would be a victory at trial.

His political opponents seized on the allegations, and angry former students — including Ms. Simpson — spoke out, painting Mr. Trump as a huckster who had conned ordinary people for personal profit.

After his election in November, Mr. Trump reversed course and agreed to pay $25 million to resolve the litigation. He did not admit fault, and he maintained in posts on Twitter after the settlement announcement that he “did not have the time to go through a long but winning trial on Trump U.”