Judge Dismisses Trump’s Wall Street Journal Defamation Lawsuit Over Published Epstein ‘Birthday Book’ for a Second Time

A federal judge has once again dismissed President Donald Trump’s defamation claims against the Wall Street Journal over a 2025 report by the paper that a 2003 birthday letter to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein was purportedly written by Trump. Trump’s lawsuit “falls short of pleading actual malice,” wrote U.S. District Judge Darrin P. Gayles […]

The top 3

  1. Legal Standard of 'Actual Malice': Under the precedent set by the 1964 Supreme Court ruling in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, public figures must prove that a media outlet acted with 'actual malice'—publishing with knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth. The court found that Trump's claims were 'conclusory' and 'vague,' failing to provide sufficient evidence that the journalists harbored serious doubts about the story's accuracy.
  2. Journalistic Practice and Denials: The court clarified that a media outlet's duty does not require them to suppress a story simply because the subject denies its validity. The judge noted that the Journal's report included Trump's own denial of the letter, which contradicts the claim that the paper acted with reckless disregard by ignoring his position.

Sources

Open the full topic