A federal judge on Monday dismissed President Trump's $20 billion defamation lawsuit against the Wall Street Journal, ruling that the president failed to meet the legal threshold required to prove the news organization acted with malice when publishing a story about a birthday letter allegedly sent to Jeffrey Epstein.
U.S. District Judge Darrin P. Gayles found that Trump's complaint "comes nowhere close" to establishing actual malice, the high bar that public figures must clear in defamation cases under U.S. law. Gayles noted that Trump's own complaint actually demonstrated the opposite of what he was trying to prove.
The judge pointed out that the Journal's reporting showed the defendants had conducted a legitimate investigation. "The complaint and the Article itself confirm that Defendants attempted to investigate," Gayles wrote. "Accordingly, President Trump's conclusory allegation that Defendants had contradictory evidence and failed to investigate is rebutted by the Article and is insufficient to establish actual malice."
Trump's legal team signaled they plan to file an amended complaint by an April 27 deadline. A Dow Jones spokesperson said the company welcomes the decision. "We stand behind the reliability, rigor and accuracy of The Wall Street Journal's reporting," the statement read.
A Deepening Pattern
The ruling marks another legal defeat for Trump in ongoing disputes with major media outlets. Since returning to office, the president has filed multiple defamation suits against news organizations, with courts consistently ruling against him.
In recent weeks, separate federal judges have rejected Trump's case against CNN on defamation grounds and dismissed his lawsuit against the New York Times over its investigation into his finances. An earlier Trump campaign lawsuit against the Times was thrown out on the grounds that opinion journalism receives First Amendment protection.
Trump's legal troubles extend beyond media cases. A federal judge last month ruled that Pentagon restrictions on journalists violated the First Amendment, siding against the Trump administration. The same judge subsequently found the Pentagon in contempt for continuing to restrict reporter access.
Separately, a federal judge sided with Voice of America employees in a lawsuit against the administration, ordering the reinstatement of more than 1,000 workers.
TMTG, the media company associated with Trump, attempted a defamation suit against more than a dozen outlets including Axios, Forbes and Reuters. That case was eventually dropped and later refiled.
What Remains Pending
Two major media cases involving the Trump administration are still in play. The Associated Press is pursuing a lawsuit against the White House over restrictions on journalist access to Air Force One and Oval Office events, with a federal panel expected to rule this year.
Trump also sued the BBC for $10 billion last year, alleging the network defamed him by editing his January 6 speech in a misleading way. The BBC has moved to dismiss the case and says it will defend the lawsuit.
Author James Rodriguez: "Trump's track record in court suggests his legal strategy of weaponizing defamation claims against the press is backfiring spectacularly, and judges appear increasingly impatient with cases that don't meet basic legal standards."
Comments