Judge Dismisses Trump's Defamation Suit Against WSJ, Murdoch With Prejudice

4.2 · 1h ago · US

The Facts

  • U.S. District Judge Darrin Gayles in Miami on Saturday dismissed with prejudice President Trump's amended defamation lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal, Rupert Murdoch and other defendants. ✓5 · CBS News, SCMP, CNBC, NBC News, Al Jazeera
  • Gayles ruled Trump did not plausibly allege that the defendants published the article with actual malice, the legal standard for public figures. ✓5 · CBS News, SCMP, CNBC, NBC News, Al Jazeera
  • Gayles wrote that the amended complaint was 'grasping at straws' as it attempted to 'manufacture' flaws with the Journal's investigation. ✓4 · CBS News, SCMP, CNBC, Al Jazeera
  • Gayles had first dismissed the suit in April; Trump refiled an amended complaint, and the judge found dismissal with prejudice appropriate because this was Trump's second attempt. ✓4 · CBS News, CNBC, NBC News, Al Jazeera
  • Dismissal with prejudice bars Trump from refiling the suit in the district court. ✓4 · CBS News, SCMP, CNBC, Al Jazeera
Dive deeper · 7 more factsShow less
  • The Journal article, published July 17, 2025, described a sexually suggestive letter bearing Trump's signature in a 2003 birthday album for Jeffrey Epstein's 50th birthday, assembled by Ghislaine Maxwell. ✓4 · CBS News, CNBC, NBC News, Al Jazeera
  • Trump denies writing or signing the letter. The House Oversight Committee released the letter after obtaining it from Epstein's estate. ✓4 · CBS News, CNBC, NBC News, Al Jazeera
  • The ruling is 20 pages long. ✓2 · CBS News, CNBC
  • A spokesperson for Trump's legal team said he will continue to press forward with the lawsuit; CBS cites a source saying the decision will likely be appealed, and CNBC reports the spokesman said Trump plans to appeal. ✓2 · CBS News, CNBC
  • Gayles rejected Trump's argument that the Journal should not have published after he denied authorship, saying it would let public figures block unfavorable reporting and 'runs afoul of the First Amendment'. He did not determine whether Trump wrote the letter. CNBC only
  • A different federal judge on Oct. 22 ordered Trump to sit for a deposition by Dec. 11 in his $10 billion defamation suit against the BBC. CNBC only
  • The amended complaint alleged Murdoch told Trump 'I will handle it' in a phone call about the article, as previously reported by Newsweek. CNBC only

Context

A federal judge in Miami permanently dismissed President Trump's defamation lawsuit over a Wall Street Journal report on a birthday letter to Jeffrey Epstein. The judge found Trump failed to plausibly allege actual malice, the standard public figures must meet.

The ruling follows an April dismissal that allowed Trump to refile. Trump's legal team said it will keep pursuing the case, and a source told CBS News an appeal is likely. Trump has other pending defamation cases against media outlets, including the BBC and The New York Times.

Conflicting Reports

  • Damages sought: CBS News reports a $20 billion lawsuit; CNBC, NBC News and Al Jazeera report $10 billion; SCMP says 'multibillion-dollar'.

How the Agent Panel Scored This

Independent AI personas each scored importance 1–10; the story's score is a trimmed mean (highest and lowest votes dropped). Vote spread: 3.

6 Policy Expert A federal judge's final dismissal with prejudice of a high-profile defamation suit against a major newspaper is a concrete court ruling with notable press-freedom implications, though it is a single case with limited direct impact on many people.
5 News Editor A concrete court ruling permanently dismissing a high-profile defamation suit by a sitting president against a major outlet is newsworthy and moderately important, though its direct impact on many people is limited.
5 Critical Reader A federal court concretely dismissed with prejudice a high-profile presidential defamation suit against a major news outlet, a real legal outcome, though its impact is limited to one case and the appeal is still pending.
4 Informed Citizen A court dismissal of a high-profile private lawsuit between Trump and a media outlet is a notable legal development, but it is a single case with limited direct impact on ordinary people and the concrete outcome is a ruling the plaintiff plans to appeal.
4 Global Affairs Analyst A federal court dismissal with prejudice of a high-profile media defamation suit is a notable concrete legal ruling, but its impact is largely limited to the parties and press-freedom precedent rather than broad immediate effects.
3 Science & Tech Analyst A court ruling dismissing a single defamation suit is a concrete legal event with limited broader impact, and the appeal is only stated intent, so it falls in the minor news range.
3 Business Analyst A court dismissal of a high-profile personal defamation suit against a media company is newsworthy but has limited economic or market impact, and the appeal plans are rhetoric rather than a concrete new action.

Sources (5)

← All stories