Judge permanently bars Trump's $10 billion case against Wall Street Journal
A federal court in Miami ruled that the president failed to prove the newspaper acted with actual malice when reporting on his ties to Jeffrey Epstein.
By Tariq Carter ·
U.S. District Judge Darrin Gayles dismissed President Donald Trump’s $10 billion lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal and media mogul Rupert Murdoch on Saturday. The federal judge in Miami threw out the case with prejudice, making the dismissal permanent and preventing the president from refiling the suit.
The legal dispute centered on a story published last year about a sexually suggestive letter and drawing attributed to Trump. The paper reported that the item appeared in a 2003 album compiled for Jeffrey Epstein’s 50th birthday. Disgraced British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell reportedly collected the letter as part of the birthday album. This occurred years before Epstein was first arrested in 2006 and later had a falling out with the president.
The Journal stated that the letter bore Trump’s name and included text framed by the outline of a hand-drawn naked woman. It ended with the phrase, “Happy Birthday, and may every day be another wonderful secret.” Trump denied writing the letter and labeled the newspaper’s coverage as false, malicious, and defamatory.
In the original complaint filed in federal court, Trump accused the paper and its reporters of knowingly and recklessly publishing numerous false statements. The suit alleged that these publications caused overwhelming financial and reputational harm to the president.
Gayles ruled that the plaintiff did not meet the legal standard for actual malice. Citing the Supreme Court’s 1964 decision in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, the judge noted that public figures must prove a media outlet knowingly published false information or showed a reckless disregard for the truth. The ruling stated that the lawsuit attempted to manufacture flaws in the Journal’s investigative reporting.
The judge had previously dismissed the suit in April, finding that Trump failed to argue the article was published with malicious intent. He granted the president the opportunity to file an amended complaint in May. In Saturday's final decision, Gayles wrote that the amended complaint fell short of pleading actual malice.
“The Amended Complaint falls short of pleading actual malice,” Gayles wrote in the ruling. “Indeed, the allegations regarding malice are conclusory, vague, sometimes inconsistent with the Article, and often irrelevant to whether Defendants knew or should have known that the statements in the Article were purportedly false.”
The decision marked a victory for the Journal in its dispute with the White House. The administration has pursued adversarial relationships with several news organizations during this term. Beyond the Journal, Trump is embroiled in lawsuits involving the BBC and The Associated Press. CNN, MS NOW, and Politico have also sued him for restored access after he banished them from the White House in mid-September.
The ruling noted that the newspaper did not ignore or minimize Trump’s denial of the letter. The judge observed that the story informed readers that the president decried the letter as a fake and denied writing it. Gayles also stated that several other allegations in the lawsuit lacked merit.
Epstein died by suicide in a New York jail cell in August 2019 while awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking charges. Trump has frequently called critical media outlets fake news and insulted their journalists during his second term. The dismissal ends the specific legal challenge regarding the Epstein birthday album coverage.
Source: ABC News
