A US judge has dismissed with prejudice Donald Trump’s lawsuit against the Wall Street Journal and its parent company, News Corp, over a 2025 article reporting on a letter allegedly sent to Jeffrey Epstein. Judge Darrin P. Gayles ruled that Trump failed to demonstrate “actual malice” on the part of the newspaper and its reporters, a high legal standard for defamation claims brought by public figures. The suit stemmed from a report detailing a letter included in a birthday book for Epstein, which the Journal described as containing a sexually suggestive drawing and a message signed by Trump. Trump has repeatedly denied writing the letter, claiming it was fabricated.
The judge previously dismissed the case in April, allowing Trump to amend his complaint, but determined the revised filing still did not meet the legal threshold for proving defamation. Gayles wrote that Trump’s allegations were “conclusory, vague, sometimes inconsistent with the article, and often irrelevant” to whether the defendants knew the information was false. The ruling emphasized that the Journal had made efforts to obtain Trump’s response before publishing the story and included his denials, demonstrating appropriate reporting standards.
Trump’s legal team stated he will continue to pursue the case, while a Dow Jones spokesperson expressed satisfaction with the court’s decision. The lawsuit notably named Rupert Murdoch as a defendant, despite his frequent alliance with Trump, as Murdoch’s News Corporation owns the Wall Street Journal. Trump had personally contacted Murdoch before publication in an attempt to halt the story. The case attracted attention because of the allegations surrounding the letter and Trump’s history of legal challenges against media organizations. The dismissed complaint marks the end of this particular legal challenge, as the dismissal is with prejudice, preventing Trump from refiling the lawsuit.
Our reading is that this ruling represents a setback for Trump’s ongoing strategy of attempting to control narratives through legal action against critical media outlets. The judge’s dismissal with prejudice suggests the legal arguments presented were demonstrably weak, and the emphasis on the Wall Street Journal’s reporting standards highlights the difficulty of winning defamation cases under the “actual malice” standard. Despite Trump’s stated intention to continue pursuing the case, this decision effectively closes this particular avenue of attack.
Read the original coverage
💬 Comments
📜 Comment Policy